AMERICAN ORATORY. 



! 



AMERICAN ORATORY, 

OR 

SELECTIONS FROM THE SPEECHES 

OP 

EMINENT AMERICANS 



COMPILED BY 

A MEMBER OF THE PHILADELPHIA BAR. 



PHILADELPHIA: 
£ C. & J. BIDDLE, No. 6 SOUTH FIFTH STREET. 

1853. 



Entered according to Act or Congress, in the vear !83t>, 
Bv Key and Bidijlk, 
In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Pennsylvania. 



Printed by T K it P H. Collins. 



I 



7 tf 



PREFACE. 



No apology can be required for presenting to the 
American public a volume of Speeches selected from the 
best efforts of their own statesmen. Public discussion 
is elsewhere the province of a few ; in our country, it is 
the duty of almost all. It is not only desirable, there- 
fore, but absolutely necessary, that all should have at 
hand those models, which the peculiar character of our 
institutions, the tone of our national thought, and the 
exigencies of our history, have combined to produce. 
Foreign orators may serve as examples of style, but the 
inhabitants of a republic must seek at home for the 
intellectual results of the government they have chosen, 
and for the illustration of those principles by which it is 
to be sustained. If they cannot always find the same 
refinement of language, or the same elaborateness of 
thought, which in older countries is the result of heredi- 
tary wealth and more scholastic education, they will 
discover at least a vigorous and masculine diction, 
patriotic sentiments, and unflinching independence, the 
appropriate attendants upon themes for the most part 
grave, and frequently severe. 

The editor does not affect to have used any extraor- 
dinary research in the compilation now presented to the 
reader. The character of the subjects discussed has 
had great influence with him in the selections he has 
m -ide. For many years past, the newspaper press has 
carried the opinions expressed in congress to every 



V] 



PREFACE. 



man's door. Those distinguished by uncommon force, 
dignity, and ability, have been received with eagerness 
and read with attention. Public sentiment has sup- 
plied the imprimatur, therefore, under which the 
present volume appears. It was, at one time, the hope 
of the publishers to present a collection of revolutionary 
speeches ; but the attempt was given up in despair. 
Those Sibylline leaves have long been scattered to the 
winds. The fervid addresses which roused our fore- 
fathers to action, did their brief business successfully ; 
but the soldiers they made had no time to be chroniclers. 
The old congress, it is believed, employed no report- 
ers ; the fame of their eloquence is therefore but tra 
ditionary : — 

" Vixere fortes ante Agamemnona 
Multi : sed ornnes illachrymabiles 
Urgentur, ignotique, longa 
Nocte, carent quia vate sacro." 

It is to be presumed, however, that many of their 
sentiments, though the language in which they were 
clothed is irretrievably lost, may be sought successfully 
in the following pages. There are names upon them 
that have never yet disgraced their revolutionary pred 
ecessors. 

Philadelphia, 1836. 



CONTENTS. 



Page 

Speech of James Wilson, January, 1775, in the Convention for the 

Province of Pennsylvania, in Vindication of the Colonies 1 

Speech of Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775, in the Convention of 

Delegates of Virginia 13 

Speech of Patrick Henry, on the Expediency of Adopting the Fed- 
eral Constitution, delivered in the Convention of Virginia, June 
5, 1788 16 

Speech of Edmund Randolph, on the Expediency of Adopting the 
Federal Constitution, delivered in the Convention of Virginia, 
June 6, 1788 34 

Speech of Patrick Henry, on the Expediency of Adopting the Fed- 
eral Constitution, delivered in the Convention of Virginia, June 
7, 1788 52 

Speech of Patrick Henry, on the Expediency of Adopting the Fed- 
eral Constitution, delivered in the Convention of Virginia, June 
24, 1788 86 

Speech of Fisher Ames, on the British Treaty, delivered in the 

House of Representatives of the United States, April 28, 1796. 94 

Speech of Edward Livingston, on the Alien Bill, delivered in the 

House of Representatives of the United States, June 19, 1798.. . 122 

Speech of Gouverneur Morris, on the Judiciary Act, delivered in the 

Senate of the United States, January 14, 1802 132 

Speech of James A. Bayard, on the Judiciary Act, delivered in the 
House of Representatives of the United States, February, 19, 
1802 151 

Speech of Gouverneur Morris, relative to the Free Navigation of the 
Mississippi, delivered in the Senate of the United States, Feb- 
ruary 25, 1803 203 

Speech of John Randolph, March 5, 1806, in Committee of the whole 
House, of Representatives, on Mr. Gregg's Resolution to Pro- 
hibit the Importation of British Goods into the United States. . . 228 

Speech of Josiah Quincy, in the House of Representatives of the 

United States, November 28, 1808 241 

Speech of John Randolph, delivered in the House of Representatives 

of the United States, December 10, 1811 255 

Speech of John C. Calhoun, in the House of Representatives of the 

United States, December 12, 1811 268 



vin CONTENTS. 

Page 



Speech of Mr. Gaston, of North Carolina, on the Loan Bill, delivered 
in the House of Representatives of the United States, February 

18, 1815 277 

Speech of William Pinkney, on the Treaty-Making Power, delivered 
in the House of Representatives of the United States, January 

10,1816 303 

Speech of William Pinkney, in the Senate of the United States, Feb- 
ruary 15, 1820, on the Missouri Question 320 

Speech of John Randolph, on the Tariff Bill, delivered in the House 

of Representatives of the United States, April 15, 1824 352 

Speech of Daniel Webster, on the Panama Mission, delivered in the 

House of Representatives of the United States, April 14, 1826. . 376 
An Oration pronounced at Cambridge, before the Society of Phi 

Beta Kappa, August 26, 1824. By Edward Everett. 409 

An Address, delivered at the Laying of the Corner-Stone of the 

Bunker Hill Monument, June 17, 1825. By Daniel Webster.. . 435 
An Oration, delivered at Cambridge, on the Fiftieth Anniversary of 
the Declaration of the Independence of the United States of 

America. By Edward Everett 451 

A Discourse, in Commemoration of the Lives and Services of John 
Adams and Thomas Jefferson, delivered in Faneuil Hall, Bos- 
ton, August 2, 1826. By Daniel Webster. 475 

A Discourse, pronounced at Cambridge, before the Phi Beta Kappa 
Society, at the Anniversary Celebration on the thirty-first day 
of August, 1826. By Joseph Story 504 



SPEECH OF JAMES WILSON, 



JANUARY, 1775, 
IN THE CONVENTION FOR THE PROVINCE OF PENNSYLVANIA; 

IN VINDICATION OF THE COLONIES. 



" A most daring spirit of resistance and disobedience still prevails in Mas- 
sachusetts, and has broken forth in fresh violences of a criminal nature. 
The most proper and effectual methods have been taken to prevent these 
mischiefs ; and the parliament may depend upon a firm resolution to with- 
stand every attempt to weaken or impair the supreme authority of parlia- 
ment over all the dominions of the crown." — Speech of the King of Great 
Britain to Parliament, Nov. 1774. 

Mr. Chairman, 

Whence, sir, proceeds all the invidious and ill-grounded clamor 
against the colonists of America ? Why are they stigmatized in 
Britain as lieentious and ungovernable ? , Why is their virtuous 
opposition to the illegal attempts of their governors, represented 
under the falsest colors, and placed in the most ungracious point 
of view ? This opposition, when exhibited in its true light, and 
when viewed, with unjaundiced eyes, from a proper situation, and 
at a proper distance, stands confessed the lovely offspring of free- 
dom. It breathes the spirit of its parent. Of this ethereal spirit, 
the whole conduct, and particularly the late conduct, of the colo- 
nists has shown them eminently possessed. It has animated and 
regulated every part of their proceedings. It has been recognized 
to be genuine, by all those symptoms and effects by which it has 
been distinguished in other ages and other countries. It has been 
calm and regular : it has not acted without occasion : it has not 
acted disproportionably to the occasion. As the attempts, open or 
secret, to undermine or to destroy it, have been repeated or enforc- 
ed, in a just degree, its vigilance and its vigor have been exerted to 
defeat or to disappoint them. As its exertions have been sufficient 
for those purposes hitherto, let us hence draw a joyful prognostic, 
that they will continue sufficient for those purposes hereafter. It 
is not yet exhausted : it will still operate irresistibly whenever a 
necessary occasion shall call forth its strength. 

Permit me, sir, bv appealing, in a few instances, to the spirit 
1 A 



2 



MR. WILSON'S SPEECH IN 



and conduct of the colonists, to evince that what I have said of 
them is just. Did they disclose any uneasiness at the proceedings 
and claims of the British parliament, before those claims and pro- 
ceedings afforded a reasonable cause for it? Did they even dis- 
close any uneasiness, when a reasonable cause for it was first 
given ? Our rights were invaded by their regulations of our in- 
ternal policy. We submitted to them : we were unwilling to op- 
pose them. The spirit of liberty was slow to act. When tho^e 
invasions were renewed : when the efficacv and malignancy of 
them were attempted to be redoubled by the stamp act ; when 
chains were formed for us ; and preparations were made for rivet- 
ing them on our limbs, what measures did we pursue ? The 
spirit of liberty found it necessary now to act : but she acted with 
the calmness and decent dignity suited to her character. Were 
we rash or seditious ? Did we discover want of loyalty to our 
sovereign ? Did we betray want of affection to our brethren in 
Britain ? Let our dutiful and reverential petitions to the throne ; 
let our respectful, though firm, remonstrances to the parliament ; 
let our warm and affectionate addresses to our brethren and (we 
will still call them) our friends in Great Britain, — let all those, 
transmitted from every part of the continent, testify the truth. 
By their testimony let our conduct be tried. 

As our proceedings, during the existence and operation of the 
stamp act, prove fully and incontestably the painful sensations that 
tortured our breasts from the prospect of disunion with Britain ; 
the peals of joy, which burst forth universally, upon the repeal of 
that odious statute, loudly proclaim the heartfelt delight produced 
in us by a reconciliation with her. Unsuspicious, because unde- 
•signing, we buried our complaints, and the causes of them, in ob- 
livion, and returned, with eagerness, to our former unreserved con- 
fidence. Our connection with our parent country, and the recipro- 
cal blessings resulting from it to her and to us, were the favorite 
and pleasing topics of our public discourses and our private con- 
versations. Lulled into delightful security, we dreamed of nothing 
but increasing fondness and friendship, cemented and strengthened 
by a kind and perpetual communication of good offices. Soon, 
however, too soon, were we awakened from the soothing dreams ! 
Our enemies renewed their designs against us, not with less malice, 
but with more art. Under the plausible pretence of regulating 
our trade^ and^ at the same time, of making provision for the ad- 
ministration of justice, and the support of government, in some of 
the colonies, they pursued their scheme of depriving us of our 
property without our consent. As the attempts to distress us, and 
to degrade us to a rank inferior to that of freemen, appeared now 
to be reduced into a regular system, it became proper, on our part, 
r.o form a regular system for counteracting them. We ceased to 



VINDICATION OF THE COLONIES. 



3 



import goods from Great Britain. Was this measure dictated by 
selfishness or by licentiousness ? Did it not injure ourselves, while 
it injured the British merchants and manufacturers ? Was it in- 
consistent with the peaceful demeanor of subjects to abstain from 
making purchases, when our freedom and our safety rendered it 
necessary for us to abstain from them ? A regard for our freedom 
and our safety was our only motive ; for no sooner had the parlia- 
ment, by repealing part of the revenue laws, inspired us with the 
flattering hopes, that they had departed from their intentions of 
oppressing and of taxing us, than we forsook our plan for defeat- 
ing those intentions, and began to import as formerly. Far from 
being peevish or captious, we took no public notice even of their 
declaratory law of dominion over us : our candor led us to consid- 
er it as a decent expedient of retreating from the actual exercise 
of that dominion. 

But, alas ! the root of bitterness still remained. The duty on 
tea was reserved to furnish occasion to the ministry for a new ef- 
fort to enslave and to ruin us ; and the East India Company were 
chosen, and consented to be the detested instruments of ministerial 
despotism and cruelty. A cargo of their tea arrived at Boston. 
By a low artifice of the governor, and by the wicked activity of 
the tools of government, it was rendered impossible to store it up, 
or to send it back, as was done at other places. A number of 
persons, unknown, destroyed it. 

Let us here make a concession to our enemies : let us suppose, 
that the transaction deserves all the dark and hideous colors in 
which they have painted it : let us even suppose (for our cause 
admits of an excess of candor) that all their exaggerated accounts 
of it were confined strictly to the truth : what will follow ? Will 
it follow, that every British colony in America, or even the colony 
of Massachusetts Bay, or even the town of Boston, in that colony, 
merits the imputation of being factious and seditious ? Let the 
frequent mobs and riots, that have happened in Great Britain upon 
much more trivial occasions, shame our calumniators into silence. 
Will it follow, because the rules of order and regular government 
were, in that instance, violated by the offenders, that, for this rea- 
son, the principles of the constitution, and the maxims of justice, 
must be violated by their punishment ? Will it follow, because 
those who were guilty could not be known, that, therefore, those 
who were known not to be guilty must suffer ? Will it follow, 
that even the guilty should be condemned without being heard — 
that they should be condemned upon partial testimony, upon the 
representations of their avowed and imbittered enemies ? Why 
were they not tried in courts of justice known to their constitution, 
and by juries of their neighborhood ? Their courts and their ju- 
ries were not, in the case of captain Preston, transported beyond 



4 



MR. WILSON'S SPEECH IN 



the bounds of justice by their resentment : why, then, should it 
be presumed, that, in the case of those offenders, they would be 
prevented from doing justice by their affection ? But the colonists, 
it seems, must be stripped of their judicial, as well as of their legis- 
lative powers. They must be bound by a legislature, they must 
be tried by a jurisdiction, not their own. Their constitutions must 
be changed : their liberties must be abridged : and those who shall 
be most infamously active in changing their constitutions and 
abridging their liberties, must, by an express provision, be exempt- 
ed from punishment. 

I do not exaggerate the matter, sir, when I extend these obser- 
vations to all the colonists. The parliament meant to extend 
the effects of their proceedings to all the colonists. The plan, on 
which their proceedings are formed, extends to them all. From 
an incident of no very uncommon or atrocious nature, which hap- 
pened in one colony, in one town in that colony, and in which only 
a few of the inhabitants of that town took a part, an occasion has 
been taken by those, who probably intended it, and who certainly 
prepared the way for it, to impose upon that colony, and to lay a 
foundation and a precedent for imposing upon all the rest, a system 
of statutes, arbitrary, unconstitutional, oppressive, in every view, 
and in every degree subversive of the rights, and inconsistent with 
even the name, of freemen. 

Were the colonists so blind as not to discern the consequences of 
these measures ? Were they so supinely inactive, as to take no 
steps for guarding against them ? They were not. They ought 
not to have been so. We saw a breach made in those barriers, 
which our ancestors, British and American, with so much care, 
with so much danger, with so much treasure, and with so much 
blood, had erected, cemented and established for the security of 
their liberties, and — with filial piety let us mention it — of ours. 
We saw the attack actually begun upon one part : ought we to 
have folded our hands in indolence, to have lulled our eyes in 
slumbers, till the attack was carried on, so as to become irresisti- 
ble, in every part ? Sir, I presume to think not. We were rous- 
ed; we were alarmed, as we had reason to be. But still our 
measures have been such as the spirit of liberty and of loyalty di- 
rected ; not such as a spirit of sedition or of disaffection would 
pursue. Our counsels have been conducted without rashness and 
faction : our resolutions have been taken without phrensy or fury. 

That the sentiments of every individual concerning that impor- 
tant object, his liberty, might be known and regarded, meetings 
have been held, and deliberations carried on, in every particular 
district. That the sentiments of all those individuals might grad- 
ually and regularly be collected into a single point, and the conduct 
of each inspired and directed by the result of the whole united, 



VINDICATION OF THE COLONIES. 



5 



county committees, provincial conventions, a continental congress, 
have been appointed, have met and resolved. By this means, a 
chain — more inestimable, and, while the necessity for it continues, 
we hope, more indissoluble than one of gold — a chain of freedom 
has been formed, of which every individual in these colonies, who 
is willing to preserve the greatest of human blessings, his liberty, 
has the pleasure of beholding himself a link. 

Are these measures, sir, the brats of disloyalty, of disaffection ? 
There are miscreants among us, wasps that suck poison from the 
most salubrious flowers, who tell us they are. They tell us that 
all those assemblies are unlawful, and unauthorized by our consti- 
tutions ; and that all their deliberations and resolutions are so 
many transgressions of the duty of subjects. The utmost malice 
brooding over the utmost baseness, and nothing but such a hatea 
commixture, must have hatched this calumny. Do not those men 
know — would they have others not to know — that it was impossi- 
ble for the inhabitants of the same province, and for the legisla- 
tures of the different provinces, to communicate their sentiments to 
one another in the modes appointed for such purposes, by their 
different constitutions ? Do not they know — would they have 
others not to know — that all this was rendered impossible by those 
very persons, who now, or whose minions now, urge this objection 
against us? Do not they know — would they have others not to 
know — that the different assemblies, who could be dissolved by 
the governors, were, in consequence of ministerial mandates, dis- 
solved by them, whenever they attempted to turn their attention 
to the greatest objects, which, as guardians of the liberty of their 
constituents, could be presented to their view ? The arch enemy 
of the human race torments them only for those actions to which 
he has tempted, but to which he has not necessarily obliged them. 
Those men refine even upon infernal malice : they accuse, they 
threaten us, (superlative impudence !) for taking those very steps, 
which we were laid under the disagreeable necessity of taking by 
themselves, or by those in whose hateful service they are enlisted. 
But let them know, that our counsels, our deliberations, our reso- 
lutions, if not authorized by the forms, because that was rendered 
impossible by our enemies, are nevertheless authorized by that 
which weighs much more in the scale of reason — by the spirit of 
cur constitutions. Was the convention of the barons at Runny- 
mede, where the tyranny of John was checked, and magna charta 
was signed, authorized by the forms of the constitution ? Was the 
convention parliament, that recalled Charles the Second, and re- 
stored the monarchy, authorized by the forms of the constitution ? 
Was the convention of lords and commons, that placed king Wil- 
liam on the throne, and secured the monarchy and liberty likewise, 
authorized by the forms of the constitution ? I cannot conceal my 
1 * 



6 



MR. WILSON'S SPEECH IN 



emotions of pleasure, when I observe, that the objections of our 
adversaries cannot be urged against us, but in common with those 
venerable assemblies, whose proceedings formed such an accession 
to British liberty and British renown. 

The resolutions entered into, and the recommendations given, 
by the continental congress, have stamped, in the plainest charac- 
ters, the genuine and enlightened spirit of liberty, upon the conduct 
observed, and the measures pursued, in consequence of them. As 
the invasions of our rights have become more and more formidable, 
our opposition to them has increased in firmness and vigor> in a 
just, and in no more than a just, proportion. We will not import 
goods from Great Britain or Ireland : in a little time we will sus- 
pend our exportations to them : and, if the same illiberal and de- 
structive system of policy be still carried on against us, in a little 
time more we will not consume their manufactures. In that col- 
ony, where the attacks have been most open, immediate and di- 
rect, some further steps have been taken, and those steps have met 
with the deserved approbation of the other provinces. 

Is this scheme of conduct allied to rebellion ? Can any symp- 
toms of disloyalty to his majesty, of disinclination to his illustrious 
family, or of disregard to his authority, be traced in it ? Those 
who would blend, and whose crimes have made it necessary for 
them to blend, the tyrannic acts of administration with the lawful 
measures of government, and to veil every flagitious procedure of 
the ministry under the venerable mantle of majesty, pretend to 
discover, and employ their emissaries to publish the pretended 
discovery of such symptoms. We are not, however, to be imposed 
upon by such shallow artifices. We know, that we have not vio- 
lated the laws or the constitution ; and that, therefore, we are safe 
as long as the laws retain their force and the constitution its vigor : 
and that, whatever our demeanor be, we cannot be safe much 
longer. But another object demands our attention. 

We behold, sir, with the deepest anguish we behold, that our 
opposition has not been as effectual as it has been constitutional. 
The hearts of our oppressors have not relented: our complaints 
have not been heard : our grievances have not been redressed : our 
rights are still invaded; and have we no cause to dread, that the 
invasions of them will be enforced, in a manner against which all 
reason and argument, and all opposition, of every peaceful kind, 
will be vain ? Our opposition has hitherto increased with our op- 
pression : shall it, in the most desperate of all contingencies, ob- 
serve the same proportion ? 

Let us pause, sir, before we give an answer to this question. 
The fate of us ; the fate of millions now alive ; the fate of millions 
yet unborn, depends upon the answer. Let it be the result of 
calmness and of intrepidity : let it be dictated by the principles of 



* 



VINDICATION OF THE COLONIES. 



7 



. loyalty, and the principles of liberty. Let it be such, as never, 
in the worst events, to give us reason to reproach ourselves, or 
others reason to reproach us for having done too much or too 
little. 

Perhaps the following resolution may be found not altogether un- 
befitting our present situation. With the greatest deference I sub- 
mit it to the mature consideration of this assembly. 

" That the act of the British parliament for altering the charter 
and constitution of the colony of Massachusetts Bay, and those 
'for the impartial administration of justice' in that colony, for shut- 
ting the port of Boston, and for quartering soldiers on the inhabit- 
ants of the colonies, are unconstitutional and void ; and can confer 
no authority upon those who act under color of them. That the 
crown cannot, by its prerogative, alter the charter or constitution 
of that colony : that all attempts to alter the said charter or consti- 
tution, unless by the authority of the legislature of that colony, are 
manifest violations of the rights of that colony, and illegal : that all 
force employed to carry such unjust and illegal attempts into exe- 
cution, is force without authority : that it is the right of British sub- 
jects to resist such force : that this right is founded both upon the 
letter and the spirit of the British constitution." 

To prove, at this time, that those acts are unconstitutional and 
void, is, I apprehend, altogether unnecessary. The doctrine has 
been proved fully, on other occasions, and has received the con- 
curring assent of British America. It rests upon plain and indu- 
bitable truths. We do not send members to the British parlia- 
ment : we have parliaments (it is immaterial what name they go 
by) of our own. 

That a void act can confer no authority upon those who proceed 
under color of it, is a self-evident proposition. 

Before I proceed to the other clauses, I think it useful to recur 
to some of the fundamental maxims of the British constitution : 
upon which, as upon a rock, our wise ancestors erected that stable 
fabric, against which the gates of hell have not hitherto prevailed. 
Those maxims I shall apply fairly, and, I flatter myself, satis- 
factorily to evince every particular contained in the resolution. 

The government of Britain, sir, was never an arbitrary govern- 
ment; our ancestors were never inconsiderate enough to trust those 
rights, which God and nature had given them, unreservedly into 
the hands of their princes. However difficult it may be, in othe»- 
states, to prove an original contract subsisting in any other man- 
ner, and on any other conditions, than are naturally and necessarily 
implied in the very idea of the first institution of a state, it is the * 
easiest thing imaginable, since the revolution of 16S8, to prove it 
in our constitution, and to ascertain some of the material articles 
ol which it consists. It has been often appealed to : it has beer. 



8 



MR. WILSON'S SPEECH IN 



often broken, at least on one part : it has been often renewed : it 
has been often confirmed : it still subsists in its full force : " it 
binds the king as much as the meanest subject." The measures 
of his power, and the limits, beyond which he cannot extend it, 
are circumscribed and regulated by the same authority, and with 
the same precision, as the measures of the subject's obedience ; 
and the limits, beyond which he is under no obligation to practise 
it, are fixed and ascertained. Liberty is, by the constitution, of 
equal stability, of equal antiquity, and of equal authority, with pre- 
rogative. The duties of the king and those of the subject are 
plainly reciprocal : they can be violated on neither side, unless 
they be performed on the other. The law is the common stand- 
ard, by which the excesses of prerogative, as well as the excesses 
of liberty, are to be regulated and reformed. 

Of this great compact between the king and his people, one es- 
sential article to be performed on his part is, that, in those cases 
where provision is expressly made and limitations set by the laws, 
his government shall be conducted according to those provisions, 
and restrained according to those limitations ; that, in those cases 
which are not expressly provided for by the laws, it shall be con- 
ducted by the best rules of discretion, agreeably to the general 
spirit of the laws, and subserviently to their ultimate end — the in- 
terest and happiness of his subjects ; that, in no case, it shall be 
Tonducted contrary to the express, or to the implied principles of 
the constitution. 

These general maxims, which we may justly consider as funda- 
mentals of our government, will, by a plain and obvious applica- 
tion of them to the parts of the resolution remaining to be proved, 
demonstrate them to be strictly agreeable to the laws and consti- 
tution. 

We can be at no loss in resolving, that the king cannot, by his 
prerogative, alter the charter or constitution of the colony of Mas- 
sachusetts Bay. Upon what principle could such an exertion of 
prerogative be justified ? On the acts of parliament ? They are 
already proved to be void. On the discretionary power which 
the king ha^ of acting where the laws are silent ? That power 
must be subservient to the interest and happiness of those concern- 
ing whom it operates. But I go further. Instead of being sup- 
ported by law, or the principles of prerogative, such an alteration 
is tocally and absolutely repugnant to both. It is contrary to ex- 
press law. The charter and constitution, we speak of, are con- 
firmed by the only legislative power capable of confirming them , 
and no other power, but that which can ratify, can destroy. If it 
is contrary to express law, the consequence is necessary, that it is 
contrary to the principles of prerogative ; for prerogative can ope- 
rate onlv when the law is silent. 



VINDICATION OF THE COLONIES. 



9 



In no view can this alteration be justified, or so much as ex- 
cused. It cannot be justified or excused by the acts of parlia- 
ment ; because the authority of parliament does not extend to it : 
it cannot be justified or excused by the operation of prerogative ; 
because this is none of the cases in which prerogative can op- 
erate : it cannot be justified or excused by the legislative authority 
of the colony; because that authority never has been, and, I pre- 
sume, never will be given for any such purpose. 

If I have proceeded hitherto, as I am persuaded I have, upon 
safe and sure ground, I can, with great confidence, advance a step 
further, and say, that all attempts to alter the charter or constitu- 
tion of that colony, unless by the authority of its own legislature, 
are violations of its rights, and illegal. 

If those attempts are illegal, must not all force, employed to 
carry them into execution, be force employed against law, and 
without authority ? The conclusion is unavoidable. 

Have not British subjects, then, a right to resist such force — 
force acting without authority — force employed contrary to law — 
force employed to destroy the very existence of law and of liberty ? 
They have, sir, and this right is secured to them both by the let- 
ter and the spirit of the British constitution, by which the measures 
and the conditions of their obedience are appointed. The British 
liberties, sir, and the means and the right of defending them, are 
not the grants of princes ; and of what our princes never granted 
ihey surely can never deprive us. 

I beg leave, here, to mention and to obviate some plausible but 
ill-founded objections, that have been, and will be, held forth by 
our adversaries, against the principles of the resolution now before 
us. It will be observed, that those, employed for bringing about 
the proposed alteration in the charter and constitution of the colony 
of Massachusetts Bay, act by virtue of a commission for that pur- 
pose from his majesty ; that all resistance of forces, commissioned 
by his majesty, is resistance of his majesty's authority and govern- 
ment, contrary to the duty of allegiance, and treasonable. These 
objections will be displayed in their most specious colors ; every 
artifice of chicanery and sophistry will be put in practice to estab- 
lish them ; law authorities, perhaps, will be quoted and tortured to 
prove them. Those principles of our constitution which were de- 
signed to preserve and to secure the liberty of the people, and, for 
the sake of that, the tranquillity of government, will be perverted 
on this, as they have been on many other occasions, from their 
true intention, and will be made use of for the contrary purpose of 
endangering the latter, and destroying the former. The names of 
the most exalted virtues, on one hand, and of the most atrocious 
imes on the other, will be employed in direct contradiction to 

B 



10 



MR. WILSON'S SPEECH IN 



the nature of those virtues, and of those crimes ; and, in this man- 
ner, those who cannot look beyond names, will be deceived ; and 
those whose aim it is to deceive by names, will have an opportu- 
nity of accomplishing it. But, sir, this disguise will not impose 
upon us. We will look to things as well as to names ; and, by 
doing so, we shall be fully satisfied, that all those objections rest 
upon mere verbal sophistry, and have not even the remotest alli- 
ance with the principles of reason or of law. 

In the first place, then, I say, that the persons who allege, that 
those, employed to alter the charter and constitution of Massachu- 
setts Bay, act by virtue of a commission from his majesty for that 
purpose, speak improperly, and contrary to the truth of the case. 
I say, they act by virtue of no such commission ; I say, it is im- 
possible they can act by virtue of such a commission. What is 
called a commission either contains particular directions for the 
purpose mentioned, or it contains no such particular directions. 
In either case, can those, who act for that purpose, act by virtue 
of a commission ? In one case, what is called a commission is 
void ; it has no legal existence ; it can communicate no authority. 
In the other case, it extends not to the purpose mentioned. The 
latter point is too plain to be insisted on ; I prove the former. 

il Id rex potest" says the law, " quod de jure potest" The 
king's power is a power according to law. His commands, if the 
authority of lord chief justice Hale may be depended upon, are 
under the directive power of the law ; and consequently invalid, 
if unlawful. " Commissions," says my lord Coke, " are legal ; 
and are like the king's writs ; and none are lawful, but such as are 
allowed by the common law, or warranted by some act of parlia- 
ment." 

Let us examine any commission expressly directing those to 
whom it is given to use military force for carrying into execution 
the alterations proposed to be made in the charter and constitution 
of Massachusetts Bay, by the foregoing maxims and authorities ; 
and what we have said concerning it will appear obvious and con- 
clusive. It is not warranted by any act of parliament, because, as 
has been mentioned on this, and has been proved on other occa- 
sions, any such act is void. It is not warranted, and I believe it 
will not be pretended that it is warranted, by the common law. It 
is not warranted by the royal prerogative, because, as has already 
been fully shown, it is diametrically opposite to the principles and 
the ends of prerogative. Upon what foundation, then, can it lean 
and be supported ? Upon none. Like an enchanted castle, it 
may terrify those, whose eyes are affected by the magic influence 
of the sorcerers, despotism and slavery ; but so soon as the charm 
is dissolved, and the genuine rays of liberty and of the constitution 



VINDICATION OF THE COLONIES. 



11 



dart in upon us, the formidable appearance vanishes, and we dis- 
cover that it was the baseless fabric of a vision, that never had any 
real existence. 

I have dwelt the longer upon this part of the objections, urged 
against us by our adversaries, because this part is the foundation of 
all the others. We have now removed it ; and they must fall of 
course. For if the force, acting for the purposes we have men- 
tioned, does not act, and cannot act, by virtue of any commission 
from his majesty, the consequence is undeniable, that it acts with- 
out his majesty's authority ; that the resistance of it is no resistance 
of his majesty's authority, nor incompatible with the duties of alle- 
giance. 

And now, sir, let me appeal to the impartial tribunal of reason 
and truth; let me appeal to every unprejudiced and judicious ob- 
server of the laws of Britain, and of the constitution of the British 
government; let me appeal, I say, whether the principles on 
which I argue, or the principles on which alone my arguments can 
be opposed, are those which ought to be adhered to and acted 
upon ; which of them are most consonant to our laws and liberties ; 
which of them have the strongest, and are likely to have the most 
effectual tendency to establish and secure the royal power and 
dignity. 

Are we deficient in loyalty to his majesty ? Let our conduct 
convict, for it will fully convict, the insinuation that we are, of 
falsehood. Our loyalty has always appeared in the true form of 
loyalty ; in obeying our sovereign according to law : let those, who 
would require it in any other form, know, that we call the persons 
who execute his commands, when contrary to law, disloyal and 
traitors. Are we enemies to the power of the crown ? No, sir, 
we are its best friends : this friendship prompts us to wish, that 
the power of the crown may be firmly established on the most 
solid basis : but we know, that the constitution alone will perpetu- 
ate the former, and securely uphold the latter. Are our princi- 
ples irreverent to majesty ? They are quite the reverse : we as- 
cribe to it perfection almost divine. We say, that the king can do 
no wrong : we say, that to do wrong is the property, not of power, 
but of weakness. We feel oppression, and will oppose it ; but 
we know, for our constitution tells us, that oppression can never 
spring from the throne. We must, therefore, search elsewhere 
for its source : our infallible guide will direct us to it. Our con- 
stitution tells us, that all oppression springs from the ministers of 
the throne. The attributes of perfection, ascribed to the king, 
are, neither by the constitution, nor in fact, communicable to his 
ministers. They may do wrong ; they have often done wrong ; 
they have been often punished for doing wrong. 

Here we may discern the true cause of all the impudent clamor 



m 



MR. WILSON'S SPEECH, &c. 



and unsupported accusations of the ministers and of their minions, 
that have been raised and made against the conduct of the Amer- 
icans. Those ministers and minions are sensible, that the oppo- 
sition is directed, not against his majesty, but against them ; be- 
cause they have abused his majesty's confidence, brought discredit 
upon his government, and derogated from his justice. They see 
the public vengeance collected in dark clouds around them : their 
consciences tell them, that it should be hurled, like a thunderbolt, 
at their guilty heads. Appalled with guilt and fear, they skulk 
behind the throne. Is it disrespectful to drag them into public 
view, and make a distinction between them and his majesty, under 
whose venerable name they daringly attempt to shelter their 
crimes ? Nothing can more effectually contribute to establish his 
majesty on the throne, and to secure to him the affections of his 
people, than this distinction. By it we are taught to consider all 
the blessings of government as flowing from the throne ; and to con- 
sider every instance of oppression as proceeding, which, in truth, is 
oftenest the case, from the ministers. 

If, now, it is true, that all force employed for the purposes so 
often mentioned, is force unwarranted by any act of parliament ; 
unsupported by any principle of the common law ; unauthorized 
by any commission from the crown ; that, instead of being em- 
ployed for the support of the constitution and his majesty's govern- 
ment, it must be employed for the support of oppression and min- 
isterial tyranny ; if all this is true (and I flatter myself it appears 
to be true), can any one hesitate to say, that to resist such force is 
lawful ; and that both the letter and the spirit of the British con- 
stitution justify such resistance ? 

Resistance, both by the letter and the spirit of the British con- 
stitution, may be carried further, when necessity requires it, than I 
have carried it. Many examples in the English history might be 
adduced, and many authorities of the greatest weight might be 
brought to show, that when the king, forgetting his character and 
his dignity, has stepped forth, and openly avowed and taken a part 
in such iniquitous conduct as has been described ; in such cases, in- 
deed, the distinction above mentioned, wisely made by the consti- 
tution for the security of the crown, could not be applied; because 
the crown had unconstitutionally rendered the application of it im- 
possible. What has been the consequence ? The distinction be- 
tween him and his ministers has been lost ; but they have not been 
raised to his situation : he has sunk to theirs. 



SPEECH OF PATRICK HENRY, 



MARCH 23, 1775, 



IN THE CONVENTION OF DELEGATES OF VIRGINIA, 

On the following' resolutions, introduced by himself: — "Resolved, That a 
well-regulated militia, composed of gentlemen and yeomen, is the natural 
strength and only security of a free government ; that such a militia in 
this colony, would forever render it unnecessary for the mother country to 
keep among us, for the purpose of our defence, any standing army of mer- 
cenary soldiers, always subversive of the quiet, and dangerous to the lib- 
erties of the people, and would obviate the pretext of taxing us for their 
support. 

" That the establishment of such a militia is, at this time, peculiarly neces- 
sary, by the state of our laws for the protection and defence of the coun- 
try, some of which are already expired, and others will shortly be so ; and 
that the known remissness of government in calling us together in legis- 
lative capacity, renders it too insecure, in this time of danger and distress, 
to rely, that opportunity will be given of renewing them, in general as- 
sembly, or making any provision to secure our inestimable rights and lib- 
erties from those further violations with which they are threatened. 

"Resolved, therefore, That this colony be immediately put into a state of de- 
fence, and that be a committee to prepare a plan for 
imbodying, arming and disciplining such a number of men as may be suf- 
ficient for that purpose." # 

Mr. President, 

No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well 
as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed 
the house. But different men often see the same subject in dif- 
ferent lights ; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disre- 
spectful to those gentlemen, if, entertaining, as I do, opinions of a 
character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments 
freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The 
question before the house is one of awful moment to this coun- 
try. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a ques- 
tion of freedom or slavery ; and in proportion to the magnitude of 
the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in 
this waj- that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfil the great 
responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I 
keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving of- 
fence, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my 
country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, 
which 1 revere above all earthly kings. 

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of 
2 



14 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH IN THE 



hope. 'We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and 
listen to the song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. 
Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous strug- 
gle for liberty ? Are we disposed to be of the number of those, 
who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things 
which so nearly concern their temporal salvation ? For my part, 
whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the 
whole truth ; to know the worst, and to provide for it. 

I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided ; and that is 
the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the fu- 
ture but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know 
what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the 
last ten years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have 
been pleased to solace themselves and the house ? Is it that in- 
sidious smile with which our petition has been lately received ? 
Trust it not, sir ; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not 
yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this 
gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike 
preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are 
fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation ? 
Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled, that force 
must be called in to win back our love ? Let us not deceive our- 
selves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation ; 
the last arguments to which kings resort. 1 ask gentlemen, sir, 
what means* this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to 
submission ? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for 
it ? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, 
to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies ? No, sir, 
she has none. They are meant for us : they can be meant for no 
other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains, 
which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what 
have we to oppose to them ? Shall we try argument ? Sir, we 
have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we any thing 
new to offer upon the subject ? Nothing. We have held the 
subject up in every light of which it is capable ; but it has been all 
in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication ? 
What terms shall we find, which have not been already exhausted ? 
Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves longer. Sir, we 
have done every thing that could be done, to avert the storm which 
is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated ; 
we have supplicated ; we have prostrated ourselves before the 
throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical 
hands of the ministry and parliament. Our petitions have been 
slighted ; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and 
insult ; our supplications have been disregarded ; and we have 
been spumed, with contempt, from the foot of the throne ! In 



HOUSE OF DELEGATES OF VIRGINIA. 



15 



vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace 
and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we 
wish to be free — if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestima- 
ble privileges for which we have been so long contending — if we 
mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have 
been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never 
to abandon, until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtain- 
ed — we must fight ! I repeat it, sir, we must fight ! An appeal 
to arms and to the God of Hosts is all that is left us ! 

They tell us, sir, that we are weak ; unable to cope with so for- 
midable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger ? Will it 
be the next week, or the next year ? Will it be when we are to- 
tally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in 
every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and in- 
action ? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance, by 
lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of 
hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot ? Sir, 
we are not weak, if we make a proper use of those means which 
the God of nature hath placed in our power. Three millions of 
people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country 
as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our 
enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our 
battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the desti- 
nies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles 
for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone ; it is to the 
vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. 

If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire 

... 

from the contest. There is no retreat, but in submission and sla- 
very ! Our chains are forged ! Their clanking may be heard on 
the plains of Boston ! The war is inevitable — and let it come ! I 
repeat it, sir, let it come. 

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, 
Peace, peace — but there is no peace. The w T ar is actually begun ! 
The next gale, that sweeps from the north, will bring to our ears 
the clash of resounding arms ! Our brethren are already in the 
field ! Why stand we here idle ? What is it that gentlemen 
wish ? What would they have ? Is life so dear, or peace so 
sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery ? 
Forbid it, Almighty God! . I know not what course others may 
take ; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death ! 



SPEECH OF PATRICK HENRY, 

ON THE EXPEDIENCY OF ADOPTING THE 

FEDERAL CONSTITUTION, 

DELIVERED IN THE CONVENTION OF VIRGINIA, JUNE 5, 1788. 



The preamble and the two first sections of the first article of the consti- 
tution being under consideration, Mr. Henry thus addressed the conven- 
tion : — 

Mr. Chairman, 
I am much obliged to the very worthy gentleman* for his en- 
comium. I wish I were possessed of talents, or possessed of any 
thing, that might enable me to elucidate this great subject. I am 
not free from suspicion : I am apt to entertain doubts : I rose yes- 
terday to ask a question, which arose in my own mind. When ] 
asked that question, I thought the meaning of my interrogation 
was obvious : the fate of this question and of America may depend 
on this. Have they said, we, the states ? Have they made a 
proposal of a compact between states ? If they had, this would 
be a confederation : it is otherwise most clearly a consolidated 
government. The question turns, sir, on that poor little thing — 
the expression, we, the people, instead of, the states of America. 
I need not take much pains to show, that the principles of this 
system are extremely pernicious, impolitic, and dangerous. Is 
this a monarchy, like England — a compact between prince and 
people ; with checks on the former to secure the liberty of the lat- 
ter? Is this a confederacy, like Holland — an association of a 
number of independent states, each of which retains its individual 
sovereignty ? It is not a democracy, wherein the people retain 
all their rights securely. Had these principles been adhered to, 
we should not have been brought to this alarming transition, from 
a confederacy to a consolidated government. We have no detail 
of those great considerations which, in my opinion, ought to have 
abounded before we should recur to a government of this kind. 
Here is a revolution as radical as that which separated us from 
Great Britain. It is as radical, if, in this transition, our rights and 
•jrivilrges are endangered, and the sovereignty of the states relin- 



* Mr. Lee, of Westmoreland. 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH, &c. 



17 



qui 1 ed. And cannot we plainly see, that this is actually the 
case { The rights of conscience, trial by jury, liberty of the press, 
all your immunities and franchises, all pretensions to human rights 
and privileges, are rendered insecure, if not lost, by this change so 
loudly talked of by some, and inconsiderately by others. Is this 
tame relinquishment of rights worthy of freemen ? Is it worthy of 
that manly fortitude that ought to characterize republicans ? It is 
said eight states have adopted this plan. I declare that if twelve 
states and an half had adopted it, I would, with manly firmness, 
and in spite of an erring world, reject it. You are not to inquire 
how your trade may be increased, nor how you are to become a 
great and powerful people, but how your liberties can be secured : 
for liberty ought to be the direct end of your government. Hav- 
ing premised these things, I shall, with the aid of my judgment 
and information, which I confess are not extensive, go into the dis- 
cussion of this system more minutely. Is it necessary for your 
liberty, that you should abandon those great rights by the adoption 
of this system ? Is the relinquishment of the trial by jury, and the 
liberty of the press, necessary for your liberty ? Will the aban- 
donment of your most sacred rights tend to the security of your 
liberty ? Liberty, the greatest of all earthly blessings — give us 
that precious jewel, and you may take every thing else. But I am 
fearful I have lived long enough to become an old-fashioned fel- 
low. Perhaps an invincible attachment to the dearest rights of 
man may, in these refined, enlightened days, be deemed old- 
fashioned : if so, I am contented to be so. I say, the time has 
been when every pulse of my heart beat for American liberty, and 
which, I believe, had a counterpart in the breast of every true 
American. But suspicions have gone forth — suspicions of my in- 
tegrity. It has been publicly reported that my professions are not 
real. Twenty-three years ago was I supposed a traitor to my 
country : I was then said to be a bane of sedition, because I sup- 
ported the rights of my country i I may be thought suspicious, 
when I say our privileges and rights are in danger ; but, sir, a 
number of the people of this country are weak enough to think 
these things are too true. I am happy to find that the gentlemen 
on the other side declare they are groundless ; but, sir, suspicion 
is a virtue, as long as its object is the preservation of the public 
good, and as long as it stays within proper bounds : should it fall 
on me, I am contented : conscious rectitude is a powerful consola- 
tion : I trust there are many who think my professions for the pub- 
lic good to be real. Let your suspicion look to both sides : there 
are many on the other side, who, possibly, may have been per- 
suaded of the necessity of these measures, which I conceive to be 
dangerous to your liberty. Guard with jealous attention the pub- 
lic liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel Un 
2* C 



13 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



fortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. When- 
ever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined. 1 am an- 
swered by gentlemen, that though I may speak of terrors, yet the 
fact is, that we are surrounded by none of the dangers I appre- 
hend. I conceive this new government to be one of those dan- 
gers : it has produced those horrors which distress many of our 
best citizens. We are come hither to preserve the poor common- 
wealth of Virginia, if it can be possibly done : something must be 
done to preserve your liberty and mine. The confederation, this 
same despised government, merits, in my opinion, the highest en- 
comium : it carried us through a lorni; and dangerous war : it ren- 
dered us victorious in that bloody conflict with a powerful nation : 
it has secured us a territory greater than any European monarch 
possesses : and shall a government which has been thus strong and 
vigorous be accused of imbecility, and abandoned for want of en- 
ergy ? Consider what you are about to do, before you part with 
this government. Take longer time in reckoning things : revolu- 
tions like this have happened in almost every country in Europe : 
similar examples are to be found in ancient Greece and ancient 
Rome — instances of the people losing their liberty by their own 
carelessness and the ambition of a few. We are cautioned, by the 
honorable gentleman wjho presides, against faction and turbulence. 
I acknowledge that licentiousness is dangerous, and that it ought 
to be provided against : I acknowledge also the new form of gov- 
ernment may effectually prevent it : yet there is another thing it 
will as effectually do : it will oppress and ruin the people. There 
are sufficient guards placed against sedition and licentiousness ; for 
when power is given to this government to suppress these, or for 
any other purpose, the language it assumes is clear, express, and 
unequivocal ; but when this constitution speaks of privileges, there 
is an ambiguity, sir, a fatal ambiguity — an ambiguity which is very 
astonishing. In the clause under consideration, there is the 
strangest language that I can conceive. I mean when it says, 
that there shall not be more representatives than one for every 
30.000. Now, sir, how easy is it to evade this privilege ? " The 
number shall not exceed one for every 30,000." This may be 
satisfied by one representative from each state. Let our numbers 
be ever so great, this immense continent may, by this artful ex- 
pression, be reduced to have but thirteen representatives. I con- 
fess this construction is not natural ; but the ambiguity of the ex- 
pression lays a good ground for a quarrel. Why was it not clearly 
and unequivocally expressed, that they should be entitled to have 
one for every 30,000 ? This would have obviated all disputes ; 
and was this difficult to be done ? What is the inference ? When 
population increases, and a state shall send representatives in this 
firoponion, Congress may remand them, because the right of hav- 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



19 



ing one for every 30,000 is not clearly expressed. This possibil- 
ity of reducing the number to one for each state, approximates to 
probability by that other expression, " but each state shall at 
least have one representative." Now, is it not clear that, from the 
first expression, the number might be reduced so much, that some 
states should have no representative at all, were it not for the in- 
sertion of this last expression ? And as this is the only restriction 
upon them, we may fairly conclude that they may restrain the 
number to one from each state. Perhaps the same horrors may 
hang over my mind again. I shall be told J am continually afraid ; 
but, sir, I have strong cause of apprehension. In some parts of 
the plan before you, the great rights of freemen are endangered, 
in other parts absolutely taken away. How does your trial by 
jury stand ? In civil cases gone — not sufficiently secured in crim- 
inal — this best privilege is gone. But we are told, that we need 
not fear, because those in power, being our representatives, will not 
abuse the powers we put in their hands. I am not well versed in 
history ; but I will submit to your recollection, whether liberty has 
been destroyed most often by the licentiousness of the people, or 
by the tyranny of rulers. I imagine, sir, you will find the balance 
on the side of tyranny. Happy will you be, if you miss the fate 
of those nations, who, omitting to resist their oppressors, or negli- 
gently suffering their liberty to be wrested from them, have 
groaned under intolerable despotism ! Most of the human race 
are now in this deplorable condition. And those nations who 
have gone in search of grandeur, power, and splendor, have also 
fallen a sacrifice, and been the victims of their own folly. While 
they acquired those visionary blessings, they lost their freedom. 
My great objection to this government is, that it does not leave us 
the means of defending our rights, or of waging war against ty- 
rants. It is urged by some gentlemen, that this new plan will 
bring us an acquisition of strength ; an army, and the militia of the 
states. This is an idea extremely ridiculous : gentlemen cannot 
be in earnest. This acquisition will trample on your fallen liber- 
ty. Let my beloved Americans guard against that fatal lethargy 
that has pervaded the universe. Have we the means of resisting 
disciplined armies, when our only defence, the militia, is put into 
the hands of congress ? 

The honorable gentleman said, that great danger would ensue, 
if the convention rose without adopting this system. I ask, where 
is that danger ? I see none. Other gentlemen have told us, 
within these walls, that the union is gone — or that the union will 
be gone. Is not this trifling with the judgment of their fellow-citi- 
zens? Till they tell us the ground of their fears, I will consider 
them as imaginary. I rose to make inquiry where those dangers 
were : thev could make no answer : I believe I never shall have 



20 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



that answer. Is there a disposition in the people of this country 
to revolt against the dominion of laws ? Has there been a single 
tumult in Virginia ? Have not the people of Virginia, when la- 
boring under the severest pressure of accumulated distresses, man- 
ifested the most cordial acquiescence in the execution of the laws ? 
What could be more awful than their unanimous acquiescence 
under general distresses ? Is there any revolution in Virginia ? 
Whither is the spirit of America gone ? Whither is the genius of 
America fled ? It was but yesterday, when our enemies marched 
in triumph through our country. Yet the people of this country 
could not be appalled by their pompous armaments : they stopped 
their career, and victoriously captured them : where is the peril 
now, compared to that ? 

Some minds are agitated by foreign alarms. Happily for us, 
there is no real danger from Europe : that country is engaged in 
more arduous business : from that quarter, there is no cause of 
fear: you may sleep in safety forever for them. Where is the 
danger ? If, sir, there was any, I would recur to the American 
spirit to defend us — that spirit which has enabled us to surmount 
the greatest difficulties : to that illustrious spirit I address my 
most fervent prayer, to prevent our adopting a system destructive 
to liberty. Let not gentlemen be told, that it is not safe to reject 
this government. Wherefore is it not safe ? We are told there 
are dangers ; but those dangers are ideal ; they cannot be demon- 
strated. To encourage us to adopt it, they tell us, that there 
is a plain, easy way of getting amendments. When I come to 
contemplate this part, I suppose that I am mad, or that my coun- 
trymen are so. The way to amendment is, in my conception, 
shut. Let us consider this plain, easy way. " The congress, 
whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall 
propose amendments to this constitution ; or, on the application of 
the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a con- 
vention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this constitution, when 
ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or 
by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other 
mode of ratification may be proposed by the congress. Provided, 
that no amendment which may be made prior to the year 1808, 
shall, in any manner, affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth 
section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, 
shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the senate." Hence it 
appears, that three fourths of the states must ultimately agree to 
any amendments that may be necessary. Let us consider the 
consequences of this. However uncharitable it may appear, yet I 
must express my opinion, that the most unworthy characters may 
get into power and prevent the introduction of amendments. Let 



✓ 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 21 

us suppose (for the case is supposable, possible, and probable), 
tnat you happen to deal these powers to unworthy hands ; will 
they relinquish powers already in their possession, or agree to 
amendments ? Two thirds of the congress, or of the state legis- 
latures, are necessary even to propose amendments. If one third 
of these be unworthy men, they may prevent the application for 
amendments ; but a destructive and mischievous feature is, that 
three fourths of the state legislatures, or of the state conventions, 
must concur in the amendments when proposed. In such numer- 
ous bodies, there must necessarily be some designing, bad men 
To suppose that so large a number as three fourths of the states 
will concur, is to suppose that they will possess genius, intelligence, 
and integrity, approaching to miraculous. It would, indeed, be 
miraculous, that they should concur in the same amendments, or 
even in such as would bear some likeness to one another. For 
four of the smallest states, that do not collectively contain one 
tenth part of the population of the United States, may obstruct the 
most salutary and necessary amendments. Nay, in these four 
states, six tenths of the people may reject these amendments ; and 
suppose that amendments shall be opposed to amendments 
(which is highly probable), is it possible that three fourths can 
ever agree to the same amendments ? A bare majority in these 
four small states may hinder the adoption of amendments ; so that 
we may fairly and justly conclude, that one twentieth part of the 
American people may prevent the removal of the most grievous 
inconveniences and oppression, by refusing to accede to amend- 
ments. A trifling minority may reject the most salutary amend- 
ments. Is this an easy mode of securing the public liberty ? It 
is, sir, a most fearful situation, when the most contemptible minor- 
ity can prevent the alteration of the most oppressive government ; 
for it may, in many respects, prove to be such. Is this the spirit 
of republicanism ? What, sir, is the genius of democracy ? Let 
me read that clause of the Bill of Rights of Virginia which relates 
to this : — 3d clause ; " That government is, or ought to be, insti- 
tuted for the common benefit, protection and security of the people, 
nation, or community. Of all the various modes and forms of 
government, that is best, which is capable of producing the greatest 
iegree of happiness and safety, and is most effectually secured 
42'ainst the danger of mal-administration, and that whenever any 
government shall be found inadequate, or contrary to these pui- 
poses, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, unaliena- 
ble and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such 
manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal." 
This, sir, is the language of democracy — that a majority of the 
community have a right to alter their government when found to 
be oppressive ; but how different is the genius of your new consti 



22 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



tution from this ! How different from the sentiments of freemen, 
that a contemptible minority can prevent the good of the majority ! 
If, then, gentlemen, standing on this ground, are come to that 
point, that they are willing to hind themselves and their posterity 
to be oppressed, I am amazed and inexpressibly astonished. If 
this be the opinion of the majority, 1 must submit ; but to me, 
sir, Jt appears perilous and destructive ; I cannot help thinking so: 
perhaps it may be the result of my age ; these may be feelings 
natural to a man of my years, when the American spirit has left 
him, and his mental powers, like the members of the body, are 
decayed. If, sir, amendments are left to the twentieth, or to the 
tenth part of the people of America, your liberty is gone forever. 
We have heard that there is a great deal of bribery practised in 
the house of commons in England ; and that many of the mem- 
bers raise themselves to preferments by selling the rights of the 
people. But, sir, the tenth part of that body cannot continue op- 
pressions on the rest of the people. English liberty is, in this 
case, on a firmer foundation than American liberty. It will be 
easily contrived to procure the opposition of one tenth of the peo- 
ple to any alteration, however judicious. 

The honorable gentleman who presides, told us, that to prevent 
abuses in our government, w T e will assemble in convention, recall 
our delegated powers, and punish our servants for abusing the 
trust reposed in them. Oh, sir, we should have fine times indeed, 
if, to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people. 
Your arms, wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone ; 
and you have no longer an aristocratical, no longer a democratical 
spirit. Did you ever read of any revolution, in any nation, brought 
about by the punishment of those in power, inflicted by those who 
had no power at all ? You read of a riot act in a country which 
is called one of the freest in the world, where a few neighbors 
cannot assemble without the risk of being shot by a hired soldiery, 
the engines of despotism. We may see such an act in America. 
A standing army we shall have, also, to execute the execrable 
commands of tyranny ; and how are you to punish them? Will 
you order them to be punished ? Who shall obey these orders ? 
Will your mace-bearer be a match for a disciplined regiment ? In 
what situation are we to be ? 

The clause before you gives a power of direct taxation, un- 
bounded and unlimited ; exclusive power of legislation in all cases 
whatsoever, for ten miles square, and over all places purchased for 
the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, he. What 
resistance could be made ? The attempt would be madness. You 
will find all the strength of this country in the hands of your ene- 
mies : those garrisons will naturally be the strongest places in the 
country. Your militia is given up to congress, also, in another 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



23 



part of this plan : they will therefore act as they think proper : all 
power will he in their own possession : you cannot force them to 
receive their punishment. Of what service would militia be to 
you, when most probably you will not have a single musket in the 
state ? For, as arms are to be provided by congress, they may, 
or may not, furnish them. 

Let us here call your attention to that part which gives the 
congress power "to provide for organizing, arming and disci- 
plining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be 
employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the 
states, respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the au- 
thority of training the militia, according to the discipline prescribed 
by congress." By this, sir, you see that their control over our 
last and best defence is unlimited. If they neglect or refuse to 
discipline or arm our militia, they will be useless : the states can 
do neither, this power being exclusively given to congress. The 
power of appointing officers over men not disciplined or armed is 
ridiculous ; so that this pretended little remnant of power, left to 
the states, may, at the pleasure of congress, be rendered nugatory. 
Our situation will be deplorable indeed : nor can we ever expect 
to get this government amended ; since I have already shown, that 
a very small minority may prevent it, and that small minority in- 
terested in the continuance of the oppression. Will the oppressor 
let go the oppressed ? Was there ever an instance ? Can the 
annals of mankind exhibit one single example, where rulers, over- 
charged with power, willingly let go the oppressed, though solicit- 
ed and requested most earnestly ? The application for amend- 
ments will therefore be fruitless. Sometimes the oppressed have 
got loose by one of those bloody struggles that desolate a country. 
But a willing relinquishment of power is one of those things, which 
human nature never was, nor ever will be, capable of. 

The honorable gentleman's observations, respecting the people's 
right of being the agents in the formation of this government, are 
not accurate, in my humble conception. The distinction between 
a national government and a confederacy, is not sufficiently dis- 
cerned. Had the delegates, who were sent to Philadelphia, a 
power to propose a consolidated government instead of a confed- 
eracy ? Were they not deputed by states, and not by the people ? 
The assent of the people, in their collective capacity, is not neces- 
sary to the formation of a federal government. The people have 
no right to enter into leagues, alliances, or confederations : they 
are not the proper agents for this purpose : states and sovereign 
powers are the only proper agents for this kind of government 
Show me an instance where the people have exercised this busi- 
ness : has it not always gone through the legislatures ? I refer 
you to the treaties with France, Holland, and other nations : how 



/ 



24 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



were they made ? Were they not made by the states ? Are the 
people, therefore, in their aggregate capacity, the proper persons 
to form a confederacy ? This, therefore, ought to depend on the 
consent of the legislatures : the people having never sent delegates 
to make any proposition of changing the government. Yet I 
must say, at the same time, that it was made on grounds the most 
pure ; and perhaps I might have been brought to consent to it, so 
far as to the change of government ; but there is one thing in it 
which I never would acquiesce in. I mean, the changing it into 
a consolidated government, which is so abhorrent to my mind. 

The honorable gentleman then went on to the figure we make 
with foreign nations; the contemptible one we make 'in France 
and Holland, which, according to the substance of my notes, he 
attributes to the present feeble government. An opinion has gone 
forth, we find, that we are a contemptible people : the time has 
been when we were thought otherwise. Under this same despised 
government, we commanded the respect of all Europe : where- 
fore are we now reckoned otherwise ? The American spirit has 
fled from hence : it has gone to regions where it has never been 
expected : it has gone to the people of France, in search of a 
splendid government — a strong, energetic government. Shall we 
imitate the example of those nations who have gone from a sim- 
ple to a splendid government ? Are those nations more worthy of 
our imitation ? What can make an adequate satisfaction to them 
for the loss they have suffered in attaining such a government — 
for the loss of their liberty ? If we admit this consolidated gov- 
ernment, it will be because we like a great and splendid one. 
Some way or other we must be a great and mighty empire : we 
must have an army, and a navy, and a number of things. When 
the American spirit was in its youth, the language of America was 
different : liberty, sir, was then the primary object. We are de- 
scended from a people whose government was founded on liberty : 
our glorious forefathers, of Great Britain, made liberty the founda- 
tion of every thing. That country is become a great, mighty and 
splendid nation ; not because their government is strong and ener- 
getic ; but, sir, because liberty is its direct end and foundation. 
We drew the spirit of liberty from our British ancestors : by that 
spirit we have triumphed over every difficulty. But now, sir, 
the American spirit, assisted by the ropes and chains of consolida- 
tion, is about to convert this country into a powerful and mighty 
empire. If you make the citizens of this country agree to become 
the subjects of one great consolidated empire of America, your 
government will not have sufficient energy to keep them together : 
such a government is incompatible with the genius of republican- 
ism. There will be no checks, no real balances, in this govern- 
ment. What can avail your specious, imaginary balances ; your 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



25 



rope-dancing, chain-rattling, ridiculous, ideal checks and contri- 
vances ? But, sir, we are not feared by foreigners : we do not make 
nations tremble. Would this constitute happiness, or secure lib- 
erty ? I trust, sir, our political hemisphere will ever direct its op- 
erations to the security of those objects. Consider our situation, 
sir : go to the poor man ; ask him what he does : he will inform 
you that he enjoys the fruits of his labor, under his own fig-tree, 
with his wife and children around him, in peace and security. Go 
to every other member of the society ; you will find the same tran- 
quil ease and content ; you will find no alarms or disturbances ! 
Why, then, tell us of dangers, to terrify us into an adoption of this 
new form of government? And yet who knows the dangers that 
this new system may produce ? They are out of the sight of the 
common people : they cannot foresee latent consequences. 1 
dread the operation of it on the middling and lower classes of 
people : it is for them I fear the adoption of this system. I fear I 
tire the patience of the committee ; but I beg to be indulged with 
a few more observations. 

When I thus profess myself an advocate for the liberty of the 
people, I shall be told I am a designing man, that I am to be a 
great man, that I am to be a demagogue ; and many similar illib- 
eral insinuations will be thrown out ; but, sir, conscious rectitude 
outweighs these things with me. I see great jeopardy in this new 
government : I see none from our present one. I hope some gen- 
tleman or other will bring forth, in full array, those dangers, if 
there be any, that we may see and touch them : I have said that 
I thought this a consolidated government : I will now prove it. 
Will the great rights of the people be secured by this government ? 
Suppose it should prove oppressive ; how can it be altered ? Our 
bill of rights declares, " that a majority of the community hath an 
indubitable, unalienable and indefeasible right to reform, alter or 
abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to 
the public weal." I have just proved, that one tenth, or less, of 
the people of America — a most despicable minority — may prevent 
this reform, or alteration. Suppose the people of Virginia should 
wish to alter their government ; can a majority of them do it ? No, 
because they are connected with other men ; or, in other words, 
consolidated with other states. When the people of Virginia, at 
a future day, shall wish to alter their government, though they 
should be unanimous in this desire, yet they may be prevented 
therefrom by a despicable minority at the extremity of the United 
States. The founders of your own constitution made your gov- 
ernment changeable ; but the power of changing it is gone from 
you ! Whither is it gone ? It is placed in the same hands that 
hold the rights of twelve other states ; and those who hold those 
rights have right and power to keep them. It is not the particu- 
3 D 



26 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



lar government of Virginia : one of the leading features of that 
government is, that a majority can alter it, when necessary for the 
public good. This government is not a Virginian, but an Ameri- 
can government. Is it not therefore a consolidated government ? 
The sixth clause of your bill of rights tells you, " that elections 
of members to serve as representatives of the people in assembly, 
ought to be free, and that all men, having sufficient evidence of 
permanent, common interest with, and attachment to, the commu- 
nity, have the right of suffrage, and cannot be taxed or deprived 
of their property, for public uses, without their own consent, or 
that of their representatives so elected, nor bound by any law to 
which they have not in like manner assented for the public good." 
But what does this constitution say ? The clause under consider- 
ation gives an unlimited and unbounded power of t&ation. Sup- 
pose every delegate from Virginia opposes a law laying a tax, 
what will it avail ? They are opposed by a majority : eleven 
members can destroy their efforts : those feeble ten cannot prevent 
the passing the most oppressive tax-law ; so that, in direct oppo- 
sition to the spirit and express language of your declaration of 
rights, you are taxed, not by your ow T n consent, but by people who 
have no connection with you. 

The next clause of the bill of rights tells you, "that all pow- 
er of suspending law, or the execution of laws, by any authority, 
without the consent of the representatives of the people, is inju- 
rious to their rights, and ought not to be exercised." This tells 
us that there can be no suspension of government, or laws, without 
our own consent ; yet this constitution can counteract and suspend 
any of our laws, that contravene its oppressive operation ; for they 
have the power of direct taxation, which suspends our bill of 
rights ; and it is expressly provided, that they can make all laws 
necessary for carrying their powers into execution ; and it is de- 
clared paramount to the laws and constitutions of the states. Con- 
sider how the only remaining defence we have left is destroyed 
in this manner. Besides the expenses of maintaining the senate 
and other house in as much splendor as they please, there is to be 
a great and mighty president, with very extensive powers — the 
powers of a king. He is to be supported in extravagant magnifi- 
cence ; so that the whole of our property may be taken by this 
American government, by laying w 7 hat taxes they please, giving 
themselves what salaries they please, and suspending our laws at 
their pleasure. I might be thought too inquisitive, but I believe I 
.should take up but very little of your time in enumerating the little 
power that is left to the government of Virginia ; for this power is 
reduced to little or nothing. Their garrisons, magazines, arsenals, 
and forts, which will be situated in the strongest places within the 
states — their ten miles square, with all the fine ornaments of human 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



2. 



life, added to their powers, and taken from the states, will reduce 
the power of the latter to nothing. The voice of tradition, 1 trust, 
will inform posterity of our struggles for freedom. If our descend- 
ants be worthy the name of Americans, they will preserve, and 
hand down to their latest posterity, the transactions of the present 
times ; and though, 1 confess, my exclamations are not worthy the 
hearing, they will see that I have done my utmost to preserve 
their liberty; for I never will give up the power of direct taxation, 
but for a scourge. 1 am willing to give it conditionally ; that is, 
after non-compliance with requisitions : I will do more, sir, and 
what I hope will convince the most skeptical man, that I am a 
lover of the American union ; that in case Virginia shall not make 
punctual payment, the control of our custom-houses, and the whole 
regulation of trade, shall be given to congress ; and that Virginia 
shall depend on congress even for passports, till Virginia shall 
have paid the last farthing, and furnished the last soldier. Nay, 
sir, there is another alternative to which I would consent ; even 
that they should strike us out of the union, and take away from us 
all federal privileges, till we comply with federal requisitions ; but 
let it depend upon our own pleasure to pay our money in the 
most easy manner for our people. Were ail the states, more ter- 
rible than the mother country, to join against us, I hope Virginia 
could defend herself ; but, sir, the dissolution of the union is most 
abhorrent to my mind. The first thing I have at heart is Ameri- 
can liberty ; the second thing is American union ; and I hope the 
people of Virginia will endeavor to preserve that union. The in- 
creasing population of the Southern States is far greater than that 
of New England ; consequently, in a short time, they will be far 
more numerous than the people of that country. Consider this, 
and you will find this state more particularly interested to support 
American liberty, and not bind our posterity by an improvident 
relinquishment of our rights. I would give the best security for a 
punctual compliance with requisitions ; but I beseech gentlemen, 
at all hazards, not to grant this unlimited power of taxation. 

The honorable gentleman lias told us that these powers, given 
to congress, are accompanied by a judiciary which will correct 
all. On examination, you will find this very judiciary oppressively 
constructed, your jury-trial destroyed, and the judges dependent 
on congress. In this scheme of energetic government, the peo- 
ple will find two sets of tax-gatherers — the state and the federal 
sheriffs. This, it seems to me, will produce such dreadful oppres- 
sion, as the people cannot possibly bear. The federal sheriff may 
commit what oppression, make what distresses, he pleases, and 
ruin you with impunity ; for how are you to tie his hands ? Have 
you any sufficient, decided means of preventing him from sucking 
your blood by speculations, commissions, and fees ? Thus thou- 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



sands of your people will be most shamefully robbed. Our state 
sheriffs, those unfeeling blood-suckers, have, under the watchful 
eye of our legislature, committed the most horrid and barbarous 
ravages on our people. It has required the most constant vigi- 
lance of the legislature to keep them from totally ruining the peo- 
ple. A repeated succession of laws has been made, to suppress 
their iniquitous speculations and cruel extortions ; and as often has 
their nefarious ingenuity devised methods of evading the force of 
those laws: in the struggle, they have generally triumphed over 
the legislature. It is a fact, that lands have sold for five shillings, 
which were worth one hundred pounds. If sheriffs, thus imme- 
diately under the eye of our state legislature and judiciary, have 
dared to commit these outrages, what would they not have done 
if their masters had been at Philadelphia or New York ? If they 
perpetrate* the most unwarrantable outrage on j^onr persons or 
property, you cannot get redress on this side of Philadelphia or 
New York ; and how can you get it there ? If your domestic 
avocations could permit you to go thither, there you must appeal 
to judges sworn to support this constitution in opposition to that o f 
any state, and who may also be inclined to favor their own offi- 
cers. When these harpies are aided by excisemen, who may 
search, at any time, your houses and most secret recesses, will the 
people bear it ? If you think so, you differ from me. Where I 
thought there was a possibility of such mischiefs, I would grant 
power with a niggardly hand ; and here there is a strong proba- 
bility that these oppressions shall actually happen. I may be 
told, that it is safe to err on that side ; because such regulations 
may be made by congress, as shall restrain these officers, and be- 
cause laws are made by our representatives, and judged by righ- 
teous judges ; but, sir, as these regulations may be made, so they 
may not ; and many reasons there are to induce a belief, that they 
will not : I shall therefore be an infidel on that point till the day 
of my death. 

This constitution is said to have beautiful features ; but when I 
come to examine these features, sir, they appear to me horribly 
frightful. Among other deformities, it has an awful squinting ; it 
squints towards monarchy : and does not this raise indignation in 
the breast of every true American ? Your president may easily 
become king. Your senate is so imperfectly constructed, that 
your dearest rights may be sacrificed by what may be a small mi- 
nority ; and a very small minority may continue forever un- 
changeably this government, although horridly defective. Where 
are your checks in this government ? Your strong-holds will be 
in the hands of your enemies. It is on a supposition that your 
American governors shall be honest, that all the good qualities of 
this government are founded ; but its defective and imperfect con- 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



29 



struction puts it in their power to perpetrate the worst of mis- 
chiefs, should they be bad men. And, sir, would not all the 
world, from the eastern to the western hemisphere, blame our dis- 
tracted folly in resting our rights upon the contingency of our 
rulers being good or bad ? Show me that age and country where 
the rights and liberties of the people were placed on the sole 
chance of their rulers being good men, without a consequent loss 
of liberty. I say that the loss of that dearest privilege has ever 
followed, with absolute certainty, every such mad attempt, if 
vour American chief be a man of ambition and abilities, how easy 
will it be for him to render himself absolute ! The army is in his 
hands, and, if he be a man of address, it will be attached to him ; 
and it will be the subject of long meditation with him to seize the 
first auspicious moment to accomplish his design. And, sir, will 
the American spirit solely relieve you when this happens ? I 
would rather infinitely — and I am sure most of this convention are 
of the same opinion, have a king, lords and commons, than a gov- 
ernment so replete with such insupportable evils. If we make a 
king, we may prescribe the rules by which he shall rule his peo- 
ple, and interpose such checks as shall prevent him from infringing 
them : but the president in the field, at the head of his army, can 
prescribe the terms on which he shall reign master, so far that it 
will puzzle any American ever to get his neck from under the gall- 
ing yoke. I cannot, with patience, think of this idea. If ever he 
violates the laws, one of two things will happen : he will come at 
the head of his army to carry every thing before him ; or, he will 
give bail, or do what Mr. Chief Justice will order him. If he be 
guilty, will not the recollection of his crimes teach him to make 
one bold push for the American throne ? Will not the immense 
difference between being master of every thing, and being igno- 
miniously tried and punished, powerfully excite him to make this 
bold push ? But, sir, where is the existing force to punish him ? 
Can he not, at the head of his army, beat down every opposition ? 
Away with your president : we shall have a king : the army will 
salute him monarch : your militia will leave you, and assist in 
making him king, and fight against you : and w r hat have you to 
oppose this force ? What will then become of you and your 
rights ? Will not absolute despotism ensue ? 

What can be more defective than the clause concerning the 
elections ? The control given to congress, over the time, place 
and manner of holding elections, will totally destroy the end of 
suffrage. The elections may be held at one place, and the most 
inconvenient in the state ; or they may be at remote distances 
from those who have a right of suffrage : hence, nine out of ten 
must either not vote at all, or vote for strangers ; for the most in 
rlueiitial characters will be applied to, to know who are the mosi 
3* 



30 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



proper to be chosen. I repeat, that the control of congress over 
the manner, he. of electing, well warrants this idea. The natural 
consequence will be, that this democratic branch will possess none 
of the public confidence : the people will be prejudiced against 
representatives chosen in such an injudicious manner. The pro- 
ceedings in the northern 'conclave will be hidden from the yeo- 
manry of this country. We are told, that the yeas and nays shall 
be taken and entered on the journals : this, sir, will avail nothing : 
it may be locked up in their chests, and concealed forever from 
the people ; for they are not to publish what parts they think 
require secrecy ; they may think, and will think, the whole re- 
quires it. 

Another beautiful feature of this constitution is the publication, 
from time to time, of the receipts and expenditures of the public 
money. This expression, from time to time, is very indefinite and 
indeterminate : it may extend to a century. Grant that any of 
them are wicked ; they may squander the public money so as to 
ruin you, and yet this expression will give you no redress. I say, 
they may ruin you ; for where, sir, is the responsibility ? The 
yeas and nays will show you nothing, unless they be fools as well 
as knaves ; for, after having wickedly trampled on the rights of 
the people, they would act like fools indeed, were they to publish 
and divulge their iniquity, when they have it equally in their 
power to suppress and conceal it. Where is the responsibility — 
that leading principle in the British government ? In that gov- 
ernment, a punishment, certain and inevitable, is provided ; but in 
this, there is no real, actual punishment for the grossest mal-ad- 
ministration. They may go without punishment, though they com- 
^mit the most outrageous violation on our immunities. That paper 
may tell me they will be punished. I ask, By what law ? They 
must make the law, for there is no existing law to do it. What — 
will they make a law to punish themselves ? This, sir, is my 
great objection to the constitution, that there is no true responsi- 
bility, and that the preservation of our liberty depends on the sin- 
gle chance of men being virtuous enough to make laws to punish 
themselves. In the country from which we are descended, they 
have real, and not imaginary responsibility ; for there, maladmin- 
istration has cost their heads to some of the most saucy geniuses 
that ever were. The senate, by making treaties, may destroy 
your liberty aad laws, for want of responsibility. Two thirds of 
those that shall happen to be present, can, with the president, 
make treaties, that shall be the supreme law of the land : they 
may make the mosfruinous treaties, and yet there is no punish- 
ment for them. Whoever shows me a punishment provided for 
them, will oblige me. So, sir, notwithstanding there are eight 
pillars, they want another. Where will they make another ? I 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



31 



trust, sir, the exclusion of the evils wherewith this system is re- 
plete, in its present form, will be made a condition precedent to 
its adoption, by this or any other state. The transition from a 
general, unqualified admission to offices, to a consolidation of gov- 
ernment, seems easy ; for, though the American states are dissim- 
ilar in their structure, this will assimilate them : this, sir, is itself a 
strong consolidating feature, and is not one of the least dangerous 
in that system. Nine states are sufficient to establish this govern- 
ment over those nine. Imagine that nine have come into it. 
Virginia has certain scruples. Suppose she will consequently re- 
fuse to join with those states : may not they still continue in friend- 
ship and union with her ? If she sends her annual requisitions in 
dollars, do you think their stomachs will be so squeamish as to re- 
fuse her dollars ? Will they not accept her regiments ? They 
would intimidate you into an inconsiderate adoption, and frighten 
you with ideal evils, and that the union shall be dissolved. 'Tis 
a bugbear, sir : the fact is, sir, that the eight adopting states can 
hardly stand on their own legs. Public fame tells us, that the 
adopting states have already heart-burnings and animosity, and re- 
pent their precipitate hurry : this, sir, may occasion exceeding 
great mischief. When I reflect on these, and many other circum- 
stances, I must think those states will be fond to be in confederacy 
with us. If we pay our quota of money annually, and furnish our 
ratable number of men, when necessary, I can see no danger from 
a rejection. The history of Switzerland clearly proves, that we 
might be in amicable alliance with those states, without adopting 
this constitution. Switzerland is a confederacy, consisting of dis- 
similar governments. This is an example, which proves that gov- 
ernments, of dissimilar structures, may be confederated. That 
confederate republic has stood upwards of four hundred years ; 
and, although several of the individual republics are democratic, 
and the rest aristocratic, no evil has resulted from this dissimilar- 
ity, for they have braved all the power of France and Germany, 
during that long period. The Swiss spirit, sir, has kept them to- 
gether: they have encountered and overcome immense difficul- 
ties, with patience and fortitude. In the vicinity of powerful and 
ambitious monarchs, they have retained their independence, re- 
publican simplicity and valor. Look at the peasants of that coun- 
try, and of France, and mark the difference. You will find the 
condition of the former far more desirable and comfortable. No 
matter whether a people be great, splendid and powerful, if they 
enjoy freedom. The Turkish grand seignior, along side of out- 
president, would put us to disgrace ; but we should be abundantly 
consoled for this disgrace, should our citizen be put in contrast 
with the Turkish slave. 

The most valuable end of government is the liberty ot the m 



32 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



habitants. No possible advantages can compensate for the loss of 
this privilege. Show me the reason why the American union is 
to De dissolved. Who are those eight adopting states ? Are they 
averse to give us a little time to consider, before we conclude ? 
Would such a disposition render a junction with them eligible ; or, 
is it the genius of that kind of government, to precipitate people 
hastily into measures of the utmost importance, and grant no indul- 
gence ? If it be, sir, is it for us to accede to such a government ? 
We have a right to have time to consider — we shall therefore in- 
sist upon it. Unless the government be amended, we can never 
accept it. The adopting states will doubtless accept our money 
and our regiments ; and what is to be the consequence, if we are 
disunited ? I believe that it is yet doubtful, whether it is not 
proper to stand by a while, and see the effect of its adoption in 
other states. In forming a government, the utmost care should 
be taken, to prevent its becoming oppressive ; and this govern- 
ment is of such an intricate and complicated nature, that no man 
on this earth can know its real operation. The other states have 
no reason to think, from the antecedent conduct of Virginia, that 
she has any intention of seceding from the union, or of being less 
active to support the general welfare. Would they not, therefore, 
acquiesce in our taking time to deliberate — deliberate whether the 
measure be not perilous, not only for us, but the adopting states ? 
Permit me, sir, to say, that a great majority of the people, even in 
the adopting states, are averse to this government. I believe I 
w T ould be right to say, that they have been egregiously misled 
Pennsylvania has, perhaps, been tricked into it. If the othei 
states, who have adopted it, have not been tricked, still they were 
too much hurried into its adoption. There were very respectable 
minorities in several of them ; and, if reports be true, a clear ma- 
jority of the people are averse to it. If we also accede, and it 
should prove grievous, the peace and prosperity of our country, 
which we all love, will be destroyed. This government has not 
the affection of the people at present. Should it be oppressive, 
their affection will be totally estranged from it — and, sir, you 
know that a government, without their affections, can neither be 
durable nor happy. I speak as one poor individual — but, when I 
speak, I speak the language of thousands. But, sir, I mean not 
to breathe the spirit, nor utter the language of secession. 

1 have trespassed so long on your patience, I am really con- 
cerned that I have something yet to say. The honorable member 
has said that we shall be properly represented : remember, sir, 
that the number of our representatives is but ten, whereof six are 
a majority. Will those men be possessed of sufficient information ? 
A particular knowledge of particular districts will not suffice. 
They must be well acquainted with agriculture, commerce, and a 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



33 



great variety of other matters throughout the continent ; they must 
know not only the actual state of nations in Europe and America, 
the situation of their farmers, cottagers and mechanics, but also the 
relative situation and intercourse of those nations. Virginia is as 
large as England. Our proportion of representatives is but ten 
men. In England, they have five hundred and thirty. The house 
of commons in England, numerous as they are, we are told, is 
bribed, and have bartered away the rights of their constituents : 
what then shall become of us ? Will these few protect our rights ? 
Will they be incorruptible ? You say they will be better men 
than the English commoners. I say they will be infinitely worse 
men, because they are to be chosen blindfolded : their election 
(the term, as applied to their appointment, is inaccurate) will be 
an involuntary nomination, and not a choice. I have, I fear, fa^ 
tigued the committee, yet I have not said the one hundred thou- 
sandth part of what I have on my mind, and wish to impart. On 
this occasion, I conceived myself bound to attend strictly to the 
interest of the state ; and I thought her dearest rights at stake : 
having lived so long — been so much honored — my efforts, though 
small, are due to my country. I have found my mind hurried on 
from subject to subject, on this very great occasion. We have all 
been out of order, from the gentleman who opened to-day, to my- 
self. I did not come prepared to speak on so multifarious a sub- 
ject, in so general a manner. I trust you will indulge me another 
time. Before you abandon the present system, I hope you will 
consider not only its defects, most maturely, but likewise those of 
that which you are to substitute for it. May you be fully apprised 
of the dangers of the latter, not by fatal experience, but by some 
abler advocate than I. 

E 



SPEECH OF EDMUND RANDOLPH, 

ON THE EXPEDIENCY OF ADOPTING THE 

FEDERAL CONSTITUTION, 

DELIVERED IN THE CONVENTION OF VIRGINIA, JUNE 6, 1788. 



Mr. Chairman, 
I am a child of the revolution. My country, very early indeed, 
took me under her protection, at a time when I most wanted it, 
and by a succession of favors and honors, prevented even my most 
ardent wishes. I feel the highest gratitude and attachment to my 
country ; her felicity is the most fervent prayer of my heart. 
Conscious of having exerted my faculties to the utmost in her be- 
half, if I have not succeeded in securing the esteem of my coun- 
trymen, I shall reap abundant consolation from the rectitude of my 
intentions : honors, when compared to the satisfaction accruing 
from a conscious independence and rectitude of conduct, are no 
equivalent. The unwearied study of my life shall be to promote 
her happiness. As a citizen, ambition and popularity are no ob- 
jects with me. I expect, in the course of a year, to retire to that 
private station which I most sincerely and cordially prefer to all 
others.* The security of public justice, sir, is what I most 
fervently wish — as I consider that object to be the primary step 
to the attainment of public happiness. I can declare to the 
whole world, that in the part I take in this very important question, 
I am actuated by a regard for what I conceive to be our true in 
terest. I can also, with equal sincerity, declare that I would join 
heart and hand in rejecting this system, did I conceive it would 
promote our happiness; but, having a strong conviction on my mind, 
at this time, that, by a disunion, we shall throw away all those 
blessings we have so earnestly fought for, and that a rejection of 
the constitution will operate disunion — pardon me if I discharge the 
obligation I owe to my country by voting for its adoption. We are 
told that thcreport of dangers is false. The cry of peace, sir, is 
false : say peace, when there is peace : it is but a sudden calm. 
The tempest growls over you — look around — wheresoever you 



Mr. Randolph was at this time governor of Virginia. 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH, &c. 



35 



look, you see danger. When there are so many witnesses, in many 
parts of America, that justice is suffocated, shall peace and happi- 
ness still be said to reign ? Candor, sir, requires an undisguised rep- 
resentation of our situation. Candor, sir, demands a faithful ex- 
position of facts. Many citizens have found justice strangled and 
trampled under foot, through the course of jurisprudence in this 
country. Are those, who have debts due them, satisfied with your 
government ? Are not creditors wearied with the tedious procras- 
tination of your legal process — a process obscured by legislative 
mists ? Cast your eyes to your seaports — see how commerce lan- 
guishes : this country, so blessed, by nature, with every advantage 
that can render commerce profitable, through defective legislation, 
is deprived of all the benefits and emoluments she might otherwise 
reap from it. We hear many complaints on the subject of located 
lands — a variety of competitors claiming the same lands under le- 
gislative acts — public faith prostrated, and private confidence de- 
stroyed. I ask you if your laws are reverenced. In every well- 
regulated community, the laws command respect. Are yours en- 
titled to reverence? We not only see violations of the constitution, 
but of national principles in repeated instances. How is the fact ? 
The history of the violations of the constitution extends from the 
year 1776 to this present time — violations made by formal acts of 
the legislature : every thing has been drawn within the legislative 
vortex. There is one example of this violation in Virginia, of a 
most striking and shocking nature ; an example so horrid, that if I 
conceived my country would passively permit a repetition of it, 
dear as it is to me, I would seek means of expatriating myself from 
it. A man, who was then a citizen, was deprived of his life, thus : 
from a mere reliance on general reports, a gentleman in the house 
of delegates informed the house, that a certain man (Josiah Phillips) 
had committed several crimes, and was running at large, perpetra- 
ting other crimes ; he therefore moved for leave to attaint him. He 
obtained that leave instantly. No sooner did he obtain it, than he 
drew from his pocket a bill already written for that effect ; it was 
read three times in one day, and carried to the senate : I will not 
say that it passed the same day through the senate ; but he was 
attainted very speedily, and precipitately, without any proof better 
than vague reports ! Without being confronted with his accusers 
and witnesses : without the privilege of calling for evidence in his 
behalf, he was sentenced to death, and was afterwards actually ex 
ecuted.* Was this arbitrary deprivation of life, the dearest gift of 
God to man, consistent with the genius of a republican govern 
ment ? Is this compatible with the spirit of freedom ? This, sir, 

* Mr. Wirt has satisfactorily shown that this statement is founded in error. — 
Life of Patrick Henry, p. 291, et seq. 



36 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH ON 



has made the deepest impression on my heart, and I cannot con- 
template it without horror. 

There are still a multiplicity of complaints of the debility of 
the laws. Justice, in many instances, is so unattainable, that com- 
merce may, in fact, be said to be stopped entirely. There is no 
peace, sir, in this land : can peace exist with injustice, licentious- 
ness, insecurity, and oppression ? These considerations, independ- 
ent of many others which I have not yet enumerated, would be a 
sufficient reason for the adoption of this constitution, because it se- 
cures the liberty of the citizen, his person and property, and will 
invigorate and restore commerce and industry. 

An additional reason to induce us to adopt it, is that excessive 
licentiousness which has resulted from the relaxation of our laws, 
and which will be checked by this government. Let us judge from 
the fate of more ancient nations. Licentiousness has produced 
tyranny among many of them : it has contributed as much (if not 
more) as any other cause whatsoever, to the loss of their liberties. 
I have respect for the integrity of our legislators ; I believe them 
to be virtuous ; but as long as the defects of the constitution exist, 
so long will laws be imperfect. The honorable gentleman went 
on further, and said, that the accession of eight states is not a rea- 
son for our adoption. Many other things have been alleged out 
of order — instead of discussing the system regularly, a variety of 
points are promiscuously debated, in order to make temporary im- 
pressions on the members. Sir, were I convinced of the validity 
of their arguments, I would join them heart and hand. Were I 
convinced that the accessions of eight states did not render our ac- 
cession also necessary to preserve the union, I would not accede to 
it till it should be previously amended : but, sir, I am convinced 
that the union will be lost by our rejection. Massachusetts has 
adopted it ; she has recommended subsequent amendments ; her 
influence must be very considerable to obtain them : I trust my 
countrymen have sufficient wisdom and virtue to entitle them to 
equal respect. 

Is it urged, that being wiser, we ought to prescribe amendments 
to the other states ? I have considered this subject deliberately ; 
wearied myself in endeavoring to find a possibility of preserving 
the union, without our unconditional ratification ; but, sir, in vain ; I 
find no other means. I ask myself a variety of questions appli- 
cable to the adopting states, and I conclude, will they repent of 
what they have done ? Will they acknowledge themselves in an 
error? Or will they recede to gratify Virginia ? My prediction 
is, that they will not. Shall we stand by ourselves, and be sever- 
ed from the union if amendments cannot be had ? I have every 
reason for determining within myself, that our rejection must dis- 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



37 



solve the union ; and that that dissolution will destroy our political 
happiness. The honorable gentleman was pleased to draw out 
several other arguments, out of order: that this government would 
destroy the state governments, the trial by jury, &c. &c. and con- 
cluded, by an illustration of his opinion, by a reference to the con- 
federacy of the Swiss. Let us argue with unprejudiced minds: he 
says, that the trial by jury is gone — is this so ? Although I have 
declared my determination to give my vote for it, yet I shall freely 
censure those parts which appear to me reprehensible. The trial 
by jury, in criminal cases, is secured ; in civil cases, it is not so ex- 
pressly secured, as I could wish it ; but it does not follow, that con- 
gress has the power of taking away this privilege, which is secured 
by the constitution of each state, and not given away by this con- 
stitution. I have no fear on this subject — congress must regulate it 
so as to suit every state. I will risk my property on the certainty, that 
they will institute the trial by jury in such manner as shall accom- 
modate the conveniences of the inhabitants in every state : the 
difficulty of ascertaining this accommodation, was the principal 
cause of its not being provided for. It will be the interest of the 
individuals composing congress, to put it on this convenient foot- 
ing. Shall we not choose men respectable for their good qualities ? 
Or can we suppose that men tainted with the worst vices will get 
into congress ? I beg leave to differ from the honorable gentle- 
man in another point. He dreads that great inconveniences will 
ensue from the federal court ; that our citizens will be harassed by 
being carried thither. 1 cannot think that this power of the federal 
judiciary will necessarily be abused. The inconvenience here 
suggested, being of a general nature, affecting most of the states, 
will, by general consent of the states, be removed ; and, I trust, 
such regulations shall be made, in this case, as will accommodate 
the people in every state. The honorable gentleman instanced the 
Swiss cantons, as an example, to show us the possibility, if not ex- 
pediency, of being in amicable alliance with the other states, with- 
out adopting this system. Sir, references to history will be fatal in 
political reasoning, unless well guarded. Our mental ability is 
often so contracted, and powers of investigation so limited, that 
sometimes we adduce as an example in our favor, what, in fact, mil- 
itates against us. Examine the situation of that country compara- 
tively to us. Its extent and situation are totally different from 
ours : it is surrounded by powerful, ambitious, and reciprocally 
jealous nations; its territory small and the soil not very fertile. 
The peculiarity, sir, of their situation, has kept these cantons to- 
gether, and not that system of alliance, to which the gentleman 
seems to attribute the durability and felicity of their connection. 

I have produced this example to show, that we ought not to 
4 



38 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH ON 



be amused with historical references, which have no kind of anal- 
ogy to the points under our consideration. We ought to confine 
ourselves to those points solely, which have an immediate and strict 
similitude to the subject of our discussion. The reference made by 
the honorable gentleman over the way, is extremely inapplicable to 
us. Are the Swiss cantons circumstanced as we are ? Are we sur- 
rounded by formidable nations ? or are we situated in any manner 
like them ? We are not, sir. Then it naturally results, that no such 
friendly intercourse as he flattered himself with, could take place, 
in case of a dissolution of our union. We are remotely situated 
from powerful nations, the dread of whose attack might impel us to 
unite firmly with one another : we are not situated in an inaccessi- 
ble, strong position : we have to fear much from one another : we 
must soon feel the fatal effects of an imperfect system of union. 

The honorable gentleman attacks the constitution, as he thinks it 
contrary to our bill of rights. Do we not appeal to the people, 
by whose authority all government is made ? That bill of rights 
is of no validity, because, I conceive, it is not formed on due 
authority. It is not a part of our constitution : it has never secur- 
ed us against any danger : it has been repeatedly disregarded and 
violated. But we must not discard the confederation, for the re- 
membrance of its past services. I am attached to old servants. I 
have regard and tenderness for this old servant: but when reason 
tells us that it can no longer be retained without throwing away all it 
has gained us, and running the risk of losing every thing dear to us, 
must we still continue our attachment ? Reason and my duty tell 
me not. Other gentlemen may think otherwise. But, sir, is it 
not possible that men may differ in sentiments, and still be honest ? 
We have an inquisition within ourselves, that leads us not to offend 
so much against chanty. The gentleman expresses a necessity of 
being suspicious of those who govern. I will agree with him in 
the necessity of political jealousy to a certain extent: but we ought 
to examine, how far this political jealousy ought to be carried. 1 
confess that a certain degree of it is highly necessary to the pres- 
ervation of liberty ; but it ought not to be extended to a degree 
which is degrading and humiliating to human nature ; to a degree 
of restlessness and active disquietude, sufficient to disturb a com- 
munity, or preclude the possibility of political happiness and con- 
tentment. Confidence ought also to be equally limited. Wisdom 
shrinks from extremes, and fixes on a medium as her choice. Ex- 
perience and history, the least fallible judges, teach us that, in form- 
ing a government, the powers to be given must be commensurate 
to the object. A less degree will defeat the intention, and a great- 
er will subject the people to the depravity of rulers, who, though 
ihey are but the agents of the people, pervert their powers to their 
own emolument and ambitious views. 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



39 



Mr. Chairman, I am sorry to be obliged to detain the house ; but 
the relation of a variety of matters renders it now unavoidable. ] 
informed the house yesterday, before rising, that I intended to show 
the necessity of having a national government, in preference to the 
confederation ; also, to show the necessity of conceding the power 
of taxation, and of distinguishing between its objects ; and I am 
the more happy, that I possess materials of information for that 
purpose. My intention then is, to satisfy the gentlemen of this 
committee, that a national government is absolutely indispensable, 
and that a confederacy is not eligible, in our present situation. 
The* introductory step to this will be, to endeavor to convince the 
house of the necessity of the union, and that the present confed- 
eration is actually inadequate and unamendable. The extent of 
the country is objected to, by the gentleman over the way, as an 
insurmountable obstacle to the establishing a national government 
in the United States. It is a very strange and inconsistent doctrine, 
to admit the necessity of the union, and yet urge this last objec- 
tion, which I think goes radically to the existence of the union it- 
self. If the extent of the country be a conclusive argument 
against a national government, it is equally so against a union with 
the other states. Instead of entering largely into a discussion of 
the nature and effect of the different kinds of government, or into 
an inquiry into the particular extent of country, that may suit the 
genius of this or that government, I ask this question — Is this gov- 
ernment necessary for the safety of Virginia ? Is the union indis- 
pensable for our happiness ? I confess it is imprudent for any 
nation to form alliance with another, whose situation and construc- 
tion of government are dissimilar with its own. It is impolitic and 
improper for men of opulence to join their interest with men of 
indigence and chance. But we are now inquiring, particularly, 
whether Virginia, as contradistinguished from the other states, can 
exist without the union — a hard question, perhaps, after what has 
been said. I will venture, however, to say, she cannot. I shall 
not rest contented with asserting — I shall endeavor to prove. Look 
at the most powerful nations on earth. England and France have 
had recourse to this expedient. Those countries found it necessary 
to unite with their immediate neighbors, and this union has prevent- 
ed the most lamentable mischiefs. What divine preeminence is 
Virginia possessed of, above other states ? Can Virginia send her 
navy and thunder, to bid defiance to foreign nations ? And can 
she exist without a union with her neighbors, when the most po- 
tent nations have found such a union necessary, not only to their 
political felicity, but their national existence ? Let us examine her 
ability. Although it be impossible to determine, with accuracy, 
what degree of internal strength a nation ought to possess, to en- 
able it to stand by itself ; yet there are certain sure facts and cjr- 



40 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH ON 



cumstances,. which demonstrate, that a particular nation cannot 
stand singly. I have spoken with freedom, and I trust I have 
done it with decency ; but I must also speak with truth. If Vir- 
ginia can exist without the union, she must derive that ability from 
one or other of these sources, viz : from her natural situation, or be- 
cause she has no reason to fear from other nations. What is her 
situation ? She is not inaccessible. She is not a petty republic, 
like that of St. Marino, surrounded with rocks and mountains, with 
a soil not very fertile, nor worthy the envy of surrounding nations. 
Were this, sir, her situation, she might, like that petty state, sub- 
sist separated from all the world. On the contrary, she is very ac- 
cessible : the large, capacious bay of Chesapeake, which is but too 
excellently adapted for the admission of enemies, renders her very 
vulnerable. I am informed, and I believe rightly, because I derive 
my information from those whose knowledge is most respectable, 
that Virginia is in a very unhappy position, with respect to the ac- 
cess of foes by sea, though happily situated for commerce. This 
being her situation by sea, let us look at land. She has frontiers 
adjoining the states of Pennsylvania, Maryland and North Carolina. 
Two of those states have declared themselves members of the 
union. Will she be inaccessible to the inhabitants of those states ? 
Cast your eyes to the western country, that is inhabited by cruel 
savages, your natural enemies. Besides their natural propensity to 
barbarity, they may be excited, by the gold of foreign enemies, to 
commit the most horrid ravages on your people. Our great, in- 
creasing population is one remedy to this evil ; but, being scattered 
thinly over so extensive a country, how difficult it is to collect their 
strength, or defend the country! This is one point of weakness. 
I wish, for the honor of my countrymen, that it was the only one. 
There is another circumstance which renders us more vulnerable. 
Are we not weakened by the population of those whom we hold 
in slavery ? The day may come, when they may make an im- 
pression upon us. Gentlemen, who have been long accustomed 
to the contemplation of the subject, think there is a cause of alarm 
in this case. The number of those people, compared to that of 
the whites, is in an immense proportion : their number amounts to 
two hundred and thirty-six thousand ; that of the whites only to 
three hundred and fifty- two thousand. Will the American spirit, so 
much spoken of, repel an invading enemy, or enable you to obtain 
an advantageous peace ? Manufactures and military stores may 
afford relief to a country exposed : have we these at present ? 
Attempts have been made to have these here. If we shall be 
separated from the union, shall our chance of having these be 
greater? Or will not the want of these be more deplorable? 
We shall be told of the exertions of Virginia, under the confeder- 
ation — her achievements, when she had no commerce. These, 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



41 



sir, were necessary for her immediate safety ; nor would these have 
availed, without the aid of the other states. Those states, then 
our friends, brothers and supporters, will, if disunited from us, be 
our bitterest enemies. 

If then, sir, Virginia, from her situation, is not inaccessible, or in- 
vulnerable, let us consider if she be protected, by having no cause 
to fear from other nations: has she no cause to fear? You will 
have cause to fear as a nation, if disunited ; you will not only have 
this cause to fear. from yourselves, from that species of population 
I before mentioned, and your once sister states, but from the arms 
of other nations. Have you no cause of fear from Spain, whose 
dominions border on your country ? Every nation, every people, 
in our circumstances, have always had abundant cause to fear. Let 
us see the danger to be apprehended from France : let us suppose 
Virginia separated from the other states : as part of the former con- 
federated states, she will owe France a very considerable sum — 
France will be as magnanimous as ever. France, by the law of 
nations, will have a right to demand the whole of her, or of the 
others. If France were to demand it, what would become of the 
property of America? Could she not destroy what little com- 
merce we have ? Could she not seize our ships, and carry havoc 
and destruction before her on our shores ? The most lamentable 
desolation would take place. We owe a debt to Spain also ; do 
we expect indulgence from that quarter ? That nation has a right 
to demand the debt due to it, and power to enforce that right. 
Will the Dutch be silent about the debt due to them ? Is there 
any one pretension, that any of these nations will be patient ? The 
debts due the British are also very considerable : these debts have 
been withheld contrary to treaty : if Great Britain will demand the 
payment of these debts, peremptorily, what will be the conse- 
quence? Can we pay them if demanded? Will no danger result 
from a refusal? Will the British nation suffer their subjects to be 
stripped of their property? Is not that nation amply able to do its 
subjects justice ? Will the resentment of that powerful and super- 
cilious nation sleep forever ? If we become one, sole nation, uni- 
ting with our sister states, our means of defence will be greater ; 
the indulgence for the payment of those debts will be greater, and 
the danger of an attack less probable. Moreover, vast quan- 
tities of lands have been sold, by citizens of this country, to Euro- 
peans, and these lands cannot be found. Will this fraud be coun- 
tenanced or endured ? Among so many causes of danger, shall 
we be sec ire, separated from our sister states ? Weakness itself, 
sir, will invite some attack upon your country. Contemplate our 
situation deliberately, and consult history : it will inform you, that 
people in our circumstances have ever been attacked, and success- 
fully : open any page, and you will there find our danger truly de- 
4* F 



42 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH ON 



picted. If such a people had any thing, was it not taken ? The 
fate which will befall us, I fear, sir, will be, that we shall be made 
a partition of. How will these our troubles be removed ? Can 
we have any dependence on commerce ? Can we make any com- 
putation on this subject? Where will our flag appear? So high 
is the spirit of commercial nations, that they will spend five times 
the value of the object, to exclude their rivals from a participation 
in commercial profits : they seldom regard any expenses. If we 
should be divided from the rest of the states, upon what footing 
would our navigation in the Mississippi be ? What would be the 
probable conduct of France and Spain ? Every gentleman may 
imagine, in his own mind, the natural consequences. To these 
considerations I might add many others of a similar nature. 
Were I to say, that the boundary between us and North Carolina 
is not yet settled, I should be told, that Virginia and that state go 
together. But what, sir, will be the consequence of the dispute 
that may arise between us and Maryland, on the subject of Poto- 
mac river ? It is thought, Virginia has a right to an equal naviga- 
tion with them in that river. If ever it should be decided on 
grounds of prior right, their charter will inevitably determine it in 
their favor. The country called the Northern Neck will probably 
be severed from Virginia. There is not a doubt but the inhabitants 
of that part will annex themselves to Maryland, if Virginia refuse 
to accede to the union. The recent example of those regulations, 
lately made respecting that territory, will illustrate that probability. 
Virginia will also be in danger of a conflict with Pennsylvania, 
on the subject of boundaries. I know that some gentlemen are 
thoroughly persuaded, that we have a right to those disputed 
boundaries : if we have such a right, I know not where it is to be 
found. 

Are we not borderers on states that will be separated from us ? 
Call to mind the history of every part of the world, where nations 
have bordered on one another, and consider the consequences of 
our separation from the union. Peruse those histories, and you 
find such countries to have ever been almost a perpetual scene of 
bloodshed and slaughter. The inhabitants of one escaping from 
punishment into the other — protection given them — consequent 
pursuit, robbery, cruelty, and murder. A numerous standing 
army, that dangerous expedient, would be necessary, but not suf- 
ficient, for the defence of such borders. Every gentleman will 
amplify the scene in his own mind. If you wish to know the ex- 
tent of such a scene, look at the history of England and Scotland 
before the union ; you will see their borderers continually commit- 
ting depredations and cruelties, of the most calamitous and deplo- 
rable nature, on one another. 

Mr. Chairman, were we struck off from the union, and disputes 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 43 



of the back lands should be renewed, which are of the most 
alarming nature, and which must produce uncommon mischiefs, can 
you inform me how this great subject would be settled? Virginia 
has a large unsettled country : she has, at last, quieted it ; but 
there are great doubts whether she has taken the best way to effect 
it. If she has not, disagreeable consequences may ensue. I have 
before hinted at some other causes of quarrel between the other 
states and us ; particularly the hatred that would be generated by 
commercial competition. I will only add, on that subject, that 
controversies may arise concerning the fisheries, which must ter- 
minate in wars. Paper money may also be an additional source 
of disputes. Rhode Island has been in one continued train of 
opposition to national duties and integrity : they have defrauded 
their creditors by their paper money. Other states have also had. 
emissions of paper money to the ruin of credit and commerce. 
May not Virginia, at a future day, also recur to the same expedi- 
ent ? Has Virginia no affection for paper money, or disposition 
to violate contracts ? I fear she is as fond of these measures as 
most other states in the union. The inhabitants of the adjacent 
states would be affected by the depreciation of paper money, 
which would assuredly produce a dispute with those states. This 
danger is taken away by the present constitution, as it provides 
" that no state shall emit bills of credit." Maryland has counter- 
acted the policy of this state frequently, and may be meditating 
examples of this kind again. Before the revolution, there was a 
contest about those back lands, in which even government was a 
party : it was put an end to by the war. Pennsylvania was 
ready to enter into a war with us for the disputed lands near the 
boundaries, and nothing but the superior prudence of the man who 
was at the head of affairs in Virginia, could have prevented it. 

I beg leave to remind you of the strength of Massachusetts, and 
other states to the north, and what would their conduct be to us if 
disunited from them. In case of a conflict between us and Mary- 
land or Pennsylvania, they would be aided by the whole strength 
of the more northern states ; in short, by that of all the adopting 
states. For these reasons, I conceive, that if Virginia supposes 
she has no cause of apprehension, she will find herself in a fatal 
error. Suppose the American spirit in the fullest vigor in Virginia, 
what military preparations and exertions is she capable of making? 
The other states have upwards of three hundred and thirty thou- 
sand men capable of bearing arms: this will be a good army, or 
they can very easily raise a good army out of so great a number. 
Our militia amounts to fifty thousand; even stretching it to the 
improbable amount (urged by some) of sixty thousand — in case 
of an attack, what defence can we make ? Who are militia ? Can 
we depend solely upon these ? I will pay the last tribute of grat. 



44 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH ON 



itude to the militia of my country : they performed some of the 
most gallant feats during the last war, and acted as nobly as men 
inured to other avocations could be expected to do ; but, sir, it is 
dangerous to look to them as our sole protectors. Did ever militia 
defend a country ? Those of Pennsylvania were said to differ 
very little from regulars ; yet these, sir, were insufficient for the 
defence of that state. The militia of our country will be wanted 
for agriculture : on this noblest of arts depends the virtue and the 
very existence of a country : if it be neglected, every thing else 
must be in a state of ruin and decay. It must be neglected if 
those hands which ought to attend to it, are occasionally called 
forth on military expeditions. Some, also, will be necessary for 
manufactures, and those mechanic arts which are necessary for the 
aid of the farmer and planter. If we had men sufficient in num- 
ber to defend ourselves, it could not avail without other requisites. 
We must have a navy, to be supported in time of peace as well as 
war, to guard our coasts and defend us against invasions. The 
impossibility of building and equipping a fleet, in a short time, con- 
stitutes the necessity of having a certain number of ships of war 
always ready in time of peace. The maintaining a navy will re- 
quire money — and where, sir, can we get money for this and 
other purposes ? How shall we raise it ? Review the enormity 
of the debts due by this country : the amount of the debt we owe 
to the continent, for bills of credit, rating at forty for one, will 
amount to between six and seven hundred thousand pounds. 
There is also due the continent the balance of requisitions due 
by us, and, in addition to this proportion of the old continental 
debt, there are the foreign, domestic, state military, and loan-office 
debts, to which when you add the British debt, where is the pos- 
sibility of finding money to raise an army or navy ? Review then 
your real ability. Shall we recur to loans ? Nothing can be more 
impolitic : they impoverish a nation : we, sir, have nothing to re- 
pay them ; nor, sir, can we procure them. Our numbers are daily 
increasing by emigration : but this, sir, will not relieve us, when 
our credit is gone, and it is impossible to borrow money. If the 
imposts and duties in Virginia, e*^en on the present footing, be 
very unproductive, and not equal to our necessities, what would 
they be if we were separated from the union ? From the first of 
September to the first of June, the. amount put into the treasury 
is only fifty-nine thousand pounds, or a little more. But, sir, if 
smuggling be introduced in consequence of high duties, or other- 
wise, and the Potomac should be lost, what hope is there of get- 
ting money from these ? 

Shall we be asked if the impost w T ould be bettered by the union ? 
J answer that it will, sir. Credit being restored and coffid^nce 
diffused in the country, merchants and men of wealth will he in- 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



45 



duced to come among us ; emigration will increase, and com- 
merce will flourish : the impost will therefore be more sure and 
productive. Under these circumstances, can you find men to de- 
fend you ? If not men, where can you have a navy? It is an 
old observation, that he who commands at sea will command the 
land ; and it is justified by modern experience in war. The sea 
can only be commanded by commercial nations. The United 
States have every means, by nature, to enable them to distribute 
supplies mutually among one another, to supply other nations with 
many articles, and to carry for other nations. Our commerce 
would net be kindly received by foreigners, if transacted solely by 
ourselves ; as it is the spirit of commercial nations to engross, as 
much as possible, the carrying trade, this makes it necessary to 
defend our commerce: but how shall we encompass this end? 
England has arisen to the greatest height, in modern times, by her 
navigation act and other excellent regulations. The same means 
would produce the same effects. We have inland navigation. 
Our last exports did not exceed one million of pounds. Our ex- 
port trade is entirely in the hands of foreigners. We have no 
manufactures — depend for supplies on other nations, and so far are 
we from having any carrying trade, that, as I have already said, 
our exports are in the hands of foreigners. Besides the profit 
that might be made by our natural materials, much greater gains 
would accrue from their being first wrought before they were ex- 
ported. England has reaped immense profits by this, nay, even 
by purchasing and working up those materials which their country 
did not afford : her success in commerce is generally ascribed to 
her navigation act. Virginia would not, encumbered as she is, 
agree to have such an act. Thus, for the want of a navy, are we 
deprived of the multifarious advantages of our natural situation ; 
nor is it possible, that if the union is dissolved, we ever should 
have a navy sufficient either for our defence or the extension of 
our trade. I beg gentlemen to consider these two things — our in- 
ability to raise and man a navy, and the dreadful consequences of 
the dissolution of the union. 

I will close this catalogue of the evils of the dissolution of the 
union, by recalling to your mind what passed in the year 17S1. 
Such was the situation of our affairs then, that the powers of a 
dictator were given to the commander-in-chief to save us from 
destruction. This shows the situation of the country to have 
been such as made it ready to embrace an actual dictator. At 
some future period, will not our distresses impel us to do what the 
Dutch have done — throw all power into the hands of a stadt- 
bolder ? How infinitely more wise and eligible, than this desperate 
alternative, is a union with our American brethren ! I feel my- 
self so abhorrent to any thing that will dissolve our union, that I 



46 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH ON 



cannot prevail with myself to assent to it directly or indirectly. 
If the union is to be dissolved, what step is to be taken ? Shall 
we form a partial confederacy ? or is it expected that we shall 
successfully apply to foreign alliance for military aid ? This last 
measure, sir, has ruined almost every nation that has used it : so 
dreadful an example ought to be most cautiously avoided ; for sel- 
dom has a nation recurred to the expedient of foreign succor with- 
out being ultimately crushed by that succor. We may lose our 
liberty and independence by this injudicious scheme of policy. 
Admitting it to be a scheme replete with safety, what nation shall 
we solicit — France ? She will disdain a connection with a people 
in our predicament. I would trust every thing to the magnanim- 
ity of that nation ; but she would despise a people who had, like 
us, so imprudently separated from their brethren ; and, sir, were 
she to accede to our proposal, with what facility could she become 
mistress of our country ! To what nation then shall we apply — to 
Great Britain ? Nobody has as yet trusted that idea. An appli- 
cation to any other must be either fruitless or dangerous ; to those 
who advocate local confederacies, and at the same time preach up 
for republican liberty, I answer, that their conduct is inconsistent ; 
the defence of such partial confederacies will require such a degree 
of force and expense as will destroy every feature of republican- 
ism. Give me leave to say, that I see nought but destruction in a 
local confederacy. With what state can we confederate but North 
Carolina — North Carolina, situated worse than ourselves ? Consult 
your own reason : I beseech gentlemen most seriously to reflect 
on the consequences of such a confederacy : 1 beseech them to 
consider whether Virginia and North Carolina, both oppressed with 
debts and slaves, can defend themselves externally, or make their 
people happy internally. North Carolina having no strength but 
militia, and Virginia in the same situation, will make, I fear, but a 
despicable figure in history. Thus, sir, I hope that I have satis- 
6ed you that we are unsafe without a union, and that in union 
alone safety consists. 

I come now, sir, to the great inquiry, whether the confederation 
be such a government as we ought to continue under; whether it 
be such a government as can secure the felicity of any free people. 
Did I believe the confederation was a good thread, which might 
be broken without destroying its utility entirely, I might be in- 
duced to concur in putting it together ; but I am so thoroughly 
convinced of its incapacity to be mended or spliced, that I would 
booner recur to any other expedient. 

When I spoke last, I endeavored to express my sentiments con- 
cerning that system, and to apologize, (if an apology was necessary) 
for the conduct of its framers — that it was hastily devised, to ena- 
ble us to repel a powerful enemy — that the subject was novel, 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



47 



and that its inefficacy was not discovered, till requisitions came to 
be made by congress. In the then situation of America, a speedy 
remedy was necessary to ward off the danger, and this sufficiently 
answered that purpose, but so universally is its imbecility now 
known, that it is almost useless for me to exhibit it at this time. 
Has not Virginia, as well as every other state, acknowledged its 
debility by sending delegates to the general convention ? The 
confederation is, of all things, the most unsafe, not only to trust to, 
in its present form, but even to amend. The object of a federal 
government is to remedy and strengthen the weakness of its individ- 
ual branches ; whether that weakness arises from situation, or any 
other external cause. With respect to the first, is it not a miracle 
that the confederation carried us through the last war ? It was our 
unanimity, sir, that carried us through it. That system was not 
ultimately concluded till the year 1781 — although the greatest 
exertions were made before that time. Then came requisitions of 
men and money : its defects then were immediately discovered : 
the quotas of men were readily sent — not so those of money. One 
state feigned inability ; another would not comply till the rest did ; 
and various excuses were offered ; so that no money was sent into 
the treasury — not a requisition was fully complied with. Loans 
were the next measure fallen upon : upwards of eighty millions of 
dollars were wanting, beside the emissions of dollars, forty for one. 
These things show the impossibility of relying on requisitions. * * 
* * If the American spirit is to be depended upon, I call him to 
awake, to see how his Americans have been disgraced ; but I have 
no hopes that things will be better hereafter. I fully expect things 
will be as they have been, and that the same derangements will 
produce similar miscarriages. Will the American spirit produce 
money or credit, unless we alter our system? Are we not in a 
contemptible situation — are we not the jest of other nations ? 

But it is insinuated by the honorable gentleman, that we want 
to be a grand, splendid and magnificent people : we wish not to 
become so : the magnificence of a royal court is not our object. 
We want government, sir — a government that will have stability, 
and give us security ; for our present government is destitute of 
the one, and incapable of producing the other. It cannot perhaps, 
with propriety, be denominated a government — being void of that 
energy requisite to enforce its sanctions. I wish my country not 
to be contemptible in the eyes of foreign nations. A well-regu- 
lated community is always respected. It is the internal situation, 
the defects of government, that attract foreign contempt — that 
contempt, sir, is too often followed by subjugation. Advert to 
the contemptuous manner in which a shrewd politician speaks of 
our government. [Here Mr. Randolph quoted a passage from 
Lord Sheffield, the purport of which was, that Great Britain might 



43 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH ON 



engross our trade on her own terms ; that the imbecility and inef- 
ficacy of our general government were such, that it was impossible 
we could counteract her policy, however rigid or illiberal towards 
us her commercial regulations might be.] Reflect but a moment 
on our situation. Does it not invite real hostility ? The conduct 
of the British ministry to us is the natural effect of our unnerved 
government. Consider the commercial regulations between us 
and Maryland. Is it not known to gentlemen, that this state and 
that have been making reprisals on each other, to obviate a repe- 
tition of which, in some degree, these regulations have been made ? 
Can we not see, from this circumstance, the jealousy, rivalship and 
hatred that would subsist between them, in case this state was out 
of the union ? They are importing states, and importing states 
will ever be competitors and rivals. Rhode Island and Connect- 
icut have been on the point of war, on the subject of their paper 
money — congress did not attempt to interpose. "When Massa- 
chusetts was distressed by the late insurrection, congress could not 
relieve her. Who headed that insurrection ? Recollect the fa- 
cility with which it was raised, and the very little ability of the 
ringleader, and you cannot but deplore the extreme debility of 
our merely nominal government : we are too despicable to be re- 
garded by foreign nations. The defects of the confederation con- 
sisted principally in the want of power. It had nominally powers 
— powers on paper, which it could not use. The power of making 
peace and war is expressly delegated to congress ; yet the power 
of granting passports, though within that of making peace and war, 
was considered by Virginia as belonging to herself. Without ad- 
equate powers vested in congress, America cannot be respectable 
in the eyes of other nations. Congress, sir, ought to be fully vested 
with power to support the union, protect the interest of the United 
States, maintain their commerce, and defend them from external 
invasions and insults, and internal insurrections ; to maintain jus- 
tice and promote harmony and public tranquillity among the states. 
A government not vested with these powers will ever be found 
unable to make us happy or respectable : how far the confedera- 
tion is different from such a government, is known to all America. 
Instead of being able to cherish and protect the states, it has been 
unable to defend itself against the encroachments made upon it by 
the states : every one of them has conspired against it — Virginia 
as much as any. This fact could be proved by reference to ac- 
tual history. I might quote the observations of an able modern 
author (not because he is decorated with the name of author, but 
because his sentiments are drawn from human nature), to prove 
the dangerous impolicy of withholding necessary powers from con- 
gress ; but I shall at this time fatigue the house as little as possi- 
ble. What are the powers of congress ? They have full author- 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



49 



lty to recommend what they please : this recommendatory power 
reduces them to the condition of poor supplicants. Consider the 
dignified language of the members of the American congress — May 
it please your high mightinesses of Virginia to pay your just pro- 
portionate quota of our national debt :• we humbly supplicate, that 
it may please you to comply with your federal duties ! We im- 
plore, we beg your obedience ! Is not this, sir, a fair representa- 
tion of the powers of congress ? Their operations are of no va- 
lidity when counteracted by the states. Their authority to rec- 
ommend is a mere mockery of government. 

But the amendability of the confederation seems to have great 
weight on the minds of some gentlemen. To what point will the 
amendments go? What part makes the most important figure ? 
What part deserves to be retained ? In it, one body has the legis- 
lative, executive and judicial powers ; but the want of efficient 
powers has prevented the dangers naturally consequent on the 
union of these. Is this union consistent with an augmentation of 
their power ? Will you then amend it, by taking away one of 
these three powers ? Suppose, for instance, you only vested it 
with the legislative and executive powers, without any control on 
the judiciary, what must be the result ? Are we not taught by 
reason, experience and governmental history, that tyranny is the 
natural and certain consequence of uniting these two powers, or 
the legislative and judicial powers exclusively, in the same body ? 
If any one denies it, I shall pass by him as an infidel not to be re- 
claimed. Wherever any two of these three powers are vested in 
One single body, they must, at one time or other, terminate in the 
destruction of liberty. In the most important cases, the assent of 
nine states is necessary to pass a law : this is too great a restric- 
tion, and whatever good consequences it may in some cases pro- 
duce, yet it will prevent energy in many other cases ; it will pre- 
vent energy, which is most necessary on some emergencies, even 
in cases wherein the existence of the community depends on vigor 
and expedition. It is incompatible with that secrecy which is the 
life of execution and despatch. Did ever thirty or forty men re- 
tain a secret ? Without secrecy no government can carry on its 
operations on great occasions : this is what gives that superiority 
in action to the government of one. If any thing were wanting to 
complete this farce, it would be that a resolution of the assembly 
of Virginia and the other legislatures, should be necessary to con- 
firm and render of any validity the congressional acts : this would 
openly discover the debility of the general government to all the 
world. But, in fact, its imbecility is now nearly the same as if 
such acts were formally requisite. An act of the assembly of 
Virginia, controverting a resolution of congress, would certainly 
prevail. 1 therefore conclude that the confederation is too defer 
5 G 



50 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH ON 



tive to deserve correction. Let us take farewell of it with rever 
ential respect, as an old benefactor. It is gone, whether this house 
says so or not. It is gone, sir, by its own weakness. 

I am afraid I have tired the patience of this house ; but I trust 
you will pardon me, as 1 was urged by the importunity of the gen- 
tleman in calling for the reasons of laying the ground-work of this 
plan. It is objected by the honorable gentleman over the way 
(Mr. George Mason), that a republican government is impractica- 
ble in an extensive territory, and the extent of the United States 
is urged as a reason for the rejection of this constitution. Let us 
consider the definition of a republican government as laid down by 
a man who is highly esteemed. Montesquieu, so celebrated among 
politicians, says, " that a republican government is that in which 
the body, or only a part of the people, is possessed of the supreme 
power ; a monarchical, that in which a single person governs, by 
fixed and established laws ; a despotic government, that in which 
a single person, without law and without rule, directs every thing, 
by his own will and caprice." This author has not distinguished 
a republican government from a monarchy by the extent of its 
boundaries, but by the nature of its principles. He, in another 
place, contradistinguishes it, as a government of laws, in opposition 
to others, which he denominates a government of men. The em- 
pire, or government of laws, according to that phrase, is that in 
which the laws are made w 7 ith the free will of the people ; hence, 
then, if laws be made by the assent of the people, the government 
may be deemed free. When laws are made with integrity, and 
executed with wisdom, the question is, whether a great extent of 
country will tend to abridge the liberty of the people. If defen- 
sive force be necessary, in proportion to the extent of country, 1 
conceive that, in a judiciously-constructed government, be the 
country ever so extensive, its inhabitants will be proportionably 
numerous, and able to defend it. Extent of country, in my con- 
ception, ought to be no bar to the adoption of a good government. 
No extent on earth seems to me too great, provided the laws be 
wisely made and executed. The principles of representation and 
responsibiiitvmay pervade a large as well as a small territory: and 
tyranny is easily introduced into a small as into a large district. 
If it be answered, that some of the most illustrious and distinguished 
authors are of a contrary opinion, I reply, that authority has no 
weight with me, till I am convinced that not the dignity of 
names, but the force of reasoning, gains my assent. 

I intended to have shown the nature of the powers which ought 
to have been given to the general government, and the reason of 
investing it with the power of taxation ; but this would require 
more time than my strength or the patience of the committee 
would now admit of. I shall conclude w r ith a few observations 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



51 



which come from my heart. I have labored for the continuance 
of the union — the rock of our salvation. I believe that as sure as 
there is a God in heaven, our safety, our political happiness and 
existence, depend on the union of the states ; and that, without 
this union, the people of this and the other states will undergo the 
unspeakable calamities which discord, faction, turbulence, war and 
bloodshed have produced in other countries. The American 
spirit ought to be mixed with American pride — pride to see the 
union magnificently triumph. Let that glorious pride which once 
defied the British thunder, reanimate you again. Let it not be re- 
corded of Americans, that, after having performed the most gallant 
exploits, after having overcome the most astonishing difficulties, 
and after having gained the admiration of the world by their in- 
comparable valor and policy, they lost their acquired reputation, 
their national consequence and happiness, by their own indiscre- 
tion. Let no future historian inform posterity that they wanted 
wisdom and virtue to concur in any regular, efficient government. 
Should any writer, doomed to so disagreeable a task, feel the in- 
dignation of an honest historian, he would reprehend and recrim- 
inate our folly with equal severity and justice. Catch the present 
moment ; seize it with avidity and eagerness ; for it may be lost, 
never to be regained. If the union be now lost, I fear it will re- 
main so forever. I believe gentlemen are sincere in their oppo- 
sition, and actuated by pure motives ; but when I maturely weigh 
the advantages of the union, and dreadful consequences of its dis- 
solution ; when I see safety on my right, and destruction on my 
left ; when I behold respectability and happiness acquired by the 
one, but annihilated by the other, — I cannot hesitate to decide in 
favor of the former. I hope my weakness, from speaking so long, 
will apologize for my leaving this subject in so mutilated a con- 
dition. It a further explanation be desired, I shall take the liberty 
to enter into it more fully another time. 



SPEECH OF PATRICK HENRY, 

ON THE EXPEDIENCY OF ADOPTING THE 

FEDERAL CONSTITUTION, 

DELIVERED IN THE CONVENTION OF VIRGINIA, JUNE 7, 1788. 



Mr. Chairman, 
I have thought, and still think, that a full investigation of the ac- 
tual situation of America ought to precede any decision on this great 
and important question. That government is no more than a 
choice among evils, is acknowledged by the most intelligent among 
mankind, and has been a standing maxim for ages. If it be de- 
monstrated, that the adoption of the new plan is a little or a trifling 
evil, then, sir, I acknowledge that adoption ought to follow ; but, 
sir, if this be a truth, that its adoption may entail misery on the 
free people of this country, I then insist, that rejection ought to 
follow. Gentlemen strongly urge that its adoption will be a mighty 
benefit to us ; but, sir, I am made of such incredulous materials, 
that assertions and declarations do not satisfy me. I must be con- 
vinced, sir. I shall retain my infidelity on that subject till I see 
our liberties secured in a manner perfectly satisfactory to my 
understanding. 

There are certain maxims, by which e very wise and enlightened 
people will regulate their conduct. There are certain political 
maxims, which no free people ought ever to abandon ; maxims, of 
which the observance is essential to the security of happiness. It 
is impiously irritating the avenging hand of Heaven, when a peo- 
ple, who are in the full enjoyment of freedom, launch out into the 
wide ocean of human affairs, and desert those maxims which alone 
can preserve liberty. Such maxims, humble as they are, are those 
only which can render a nation safe or formidable. Poor, little, 
humble republican maxims have attracted the admiration and en- 
gaged the attention of the virtuous and wise in all nations, and 
have stood the shock of ages. We do not now admit the validity 
of maxims which we once delighted in. We have since adopted 
maxims of a different, but more refined nature ; new maxims, 
which tend to the prostration of republicanism. 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH, &c. 



53 



We have one, sir, that all men are by nature free and independ- 
ent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter 
into society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their 
posterity. We have a set of maxims of the same spirit, which 
must be beloved by every friend to liberty, to virtue, to mankind 
— our bill of rights contains those admirable maxims. 

Now, sir, I say, let us consider, whether the picture given of 
American affairs ought to drive us from those beloved maxims. 

The honorable gentleman (Mr. Randolph) has said, that it is 
too late in the day for us to reject this new plan. That system 
which was once execrated by the honorable member, must now be 
adopted, let its defects be ever so glaring. That honorable mem- 
ber will not accuse me of want of candor, when I cast in my mind 
what he has given the public,* and compare it to what has hap- 
pened since. It seems to me very strange and unaccountable, 
that what was the object of his execration should now receive his 
encomiums. Something extraordinary must have operated so 
great a change in his opinion. It is too late in the day ! Gen- 
tlemen must excuse me, if they should declare, again and again, 
that it is too late, and I should think differently. I never can be- 
lieve, sir, that it is too late to save all that is precious. If it be 
proper, and independently of every external consideration, wisely 
constructed, let us receive it; but, sir, shall its adoption, by eight 
states, induce us to receive it, if it be replete with the most dan- 
gerous defects? They urge, that subsequent amendments are 
safer than previous amendments, and that they will answer the 
same ends. At present, we have our liberties and privileges 
in our own hands. Let us not relinquish them. Let us not 
adopt this system till we see them secured. There is some small 
possibility, that should we follow the conduct of Massachusetts, 
amendments might be obtained. There is a small possibility of 
amending any government ; but, sir, shall we abandon our inesti- 
mable rights, and rest their security on a mere possibility ? The 
gentleman fears the loss of the union. If eight states have rati- 
fied it unamended, and we should rashly imitate their precipitate 
example, do we not thereby disunite from several other states? 
Shall those who have risked their lives for the sake of union be at 
once thrown out of it? If it be amended, every state will accede 
to it ; but by an imprudent adoption in its defective and dangerous 
state, a schism must inevitably be the consequence ; 1 can never, 
therefore, consent to hazard our unalienable rights on an absolute 
uncertainty. You are told there is no peace, although you fondly 
flatter yourselves that all is peace — no peace ; a general cry and 
alarm in the country ; commerce, riches and wealth vanished ; 

* Mr. Randolph had addressed a letter on that subject to the speaker of the 
house of delegates. 

5 * 



54 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



citizens going to seek comforts in other parts of the world ; 
laws insulted ; many instances of tyrannical legislation. These 
things, sir. are new to me. He has made the discovery. As to 
the administration of justice, I believe that failures in commerce, 
he. cannot be attributed to it. My age enables me to recollect 
its progress under the old government. I can justify it by saying, 
that it continues in the same manner in this state, as it did under 
the former government. As to other parts of the continent, I re- 
fer that to other gentlemen. As to the ability of those who ad- 
minister it, I believe they would not suffer by a comparison with 
those who administered it under the royal authority. Where is 
the cause of complaint if the wealthy go away ? Is this, added 
to the other circumstances, of such enormity, and does it bring 
such danger over this commonwealth, as to warrant so important, 
and so awful a change, in so precipitate a manner? As to insults 
offered to the laws, I know of none. In this respect, I believe 
this commonwealth w T ould not suffer by a comparison with the for- 
mer government. The law T s are as well executed, and as patient- 
ly acquiesced in, as they were under the royal administration. 
Compare the situation of the country ; compare that of our citi- 
zens to what they were then, and decide whether persons and 
property are not as safe and secure as they were at that time. Is 
there a man in this commonwealth, whose person can be insulted 
with impunity ? Cannot redress be had here for personal insults 
or injuries, as well as in any part of the world ; as well as in those 
countries w T here aristocrats and monarchs triumph and reign ? Is 
not the protection of property in full operation here ? The con- 
trary cannot with truth be charged on this commonwealth. Those 
severe charges which are exhibited against it, appear to me totally 
groundless. On a fair investigation, we shall be found to be sur- 
rounded by no real dangers. We have the animating fortitude and 
persevering alacrity of republican men, to carry us through mis- 
fortunes and calamities. 'Tis the fortune of a republic to be able 
to withstand the stormy ocean of human vicissitudes. I know of 
no danger aw r aiting us. Public and private security are to be 
found here in the highest degree. Sir, it is the fortune of a free 
people not to be intimidated by imaginary dangers. Fear is the 
passion of slaves. Our political and natural hemispheres are now 
equally tranquil. Let us recollect the awful magnitude of the 
subject of our deliberation. Let us consider the latent conse- 
quences of an erroneous .decision, and let not our minds be led 
away by unfair misrepresentations and uncandid suggestions. 
There have been many instances of uncommon lenity and temper- 
ance used in the exercise of power in this commonwealth. I could 
call your recollection to many that happened during the war and 
since; but every gentleman here must be apprized of them. 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



55 



The honorable member has given* you an elaborate account of 
what he judges tyrannical legislation, and an ex post facto law in 
the case of Josiah Phillips. He has misrepresented the facts. 
That man was not executed by a tyrannical stroke of power ; nor 
was he a Socrates. He was a fugitive murderer and an outlaw ; a 
man who commanded an infamous banditti, at a time when the 
war was at the most perilous stage. He committed the most cruel 
and shocking barbarities. He was an enemy to the human name. 
Those who declare war against the human race may be struck out 
of existence as soon as they are apprehended. He was not exe- 
cuted according to those beautiful legal ceremonies, which are 
pointed out by the laws, in criminal cases. The enormity of his 
crimes did not entitle him to it. I am truly a friend to legal forms 
and methods ; but, sir, the occasion warranted the measure. A 
pirate, an outlaw, or a common enemy to all mankind, may be put 
to death at .any time. It is justified by the laws of nature and 
nations. 

The honorable member tells us, then, that there are burnings 
and discontents in the hearts of our citizens in general, and that 
they are dissatisfied with their government. I have no doubt the 
honorable member believes this to be the case, because he says so. 
But I have the comfortable assurance, that it is a certain fact that 
it is not so. The middle and lower ranks of people have not 
those illumined ideas, which the well-born are so happily possessed 
of: they cannot so readily perceive latent objects. The micro- 
scopic eyes of modern statesmen can see abundance of defects in 
old systems ; and their illumined imaginations discover the necessi- 
ty of a change. They are captivated by the parade of the num- 
ber ten ; the charms of the ten miles square. Sir, I fear this 
change will ultimately lead to our ruin. My fears are not the 
force of imagination ; they are but too well founded. I tremble 
for my country ; but, sir, I trust, I rely, and I am confident, that 
this political speculation has not taken so strong a hold of men's 
minds, as some would make us believe. 

The dangers which may arise from our geographical situation 
will be more properly considered a while hence. At present, 
what may be surmised on the subject, with respect to the adjacent 
states, is merely visionary. Strength, sir, is a relative term. 
When I reflect on the natural force of those nations that might be 
induced to attack us, and consider the difficulty of the attempt and 
uncertainty of the success, and compare thereto the relative 
strength of our country, I say that we are strong. We have no 
cause to fear from that quarter ; we have nothing to dread from 
our neighboring states. The superiority of our cause would give 
us an advantage over them, were they so unfriendly or rash as to 
attack us. As to that part of the community, which the bono** 



56 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



able gentleman spoke of as in danger of being separated from us, 
what incitement or inducement could its inhabitants have to wish 
such an event ? It is a matter of doubt whether they would de- 
rive any advantage to themselves, or be any loss to us by such a 
separation. Time has been, and may yet come, when they will 
find it their advantage and true interest to be united with us. 
There is no danger of a dismemberment of our country, unless a 
constitution be adopted which will enable the government to plant 
enemies on our backs. By the confederation, the rights of territo- 
ry are secured. No treaty can be made without the consent of 
nine states. While the consent of nine states is necessary to the 
cession of territory, you are safe. If it be put in the power of a 
less number, you will most infallibly lose the Mississippi. As long 
as we can preserve our unalienable rights, we are in safety. This 
new constitution will involve in its operation the loss of the navi- 
gation of that valuable river. The honorable gentleman cannot 
be ignorant of the Spanish transactions. A treaty had been nearly 
entered into with Spain, to relinquish that navigation, and that re- 
liquishment would absolutely have taken place, had the consent of 
seven states been sufficient. The honorable gentleman told us 
then, that eight states having adopted this system, we cannot sup- 
pose they will recede on our account. I know not what they may 
do ; but this I know, that a people of infinitely less importance 
than those of Virginia, stood the terror of war. Vermont, sir, 
withstood the terror of thirteen states. Maryland did not accede 
to the confederation till the year 1781. These two states, feeble 
as they are, comparatively to us, were not afraid of the whole 
union. Did either of these states perish ? No, sir, they were 
admitted freely into the union. Will not Virginia then be admit- 
ted ? I flatter myself that those states who have ratified the new 
plan of government will open their arms and cheerfully receive us, 
although we should propose certain amendments as the conditions 
on which we would ratify it. During the late war, all the states 
were in pursuit of the same object. To obtain that object, they 
made the most strenuous exertions. They did not suffer trivial 
considerations to impede its acquisition. Give me leave to say, 
that if the smallest states in the union were admitted into it, after 
having unreasonably procrastinated their accession, the greatest 
and most mighty state in the union will be easily admitted, when 
her reluctance to an immediate accession to this system is founded 
on the most reasonable grounds. When I call this the most migh- 
ty state in the union, do I not speak the truth ? Does not Vir- 
ginia surpass every state in the union, in number of inhabitants, ex- 
tent of territory, felicity of position, and affluence and wealth? 
Some infatuation hangs over men's minds, that they will inconsid- 
?rately precipitate into measures the most important, and give not 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



57 



a moment's deliberation to others, nor pay any respect to their 
opinions. Is this federalism? Are these the beloved effects of 
the federal spirit, that its votaries will never accede to the just 
propositions of others ? Sir, were there nothing objectionable in 
it but that, I would vote against it. 1 desire to have nothing to do 
with such men as will obstinately refuse to change their opinions. 
Are our opinions not to be regarded ? I hope that you will recol- 
lect, that you are going to join with men who will pay no respect 
even to this state. 

Switzerland consists of thirteen cantons expressly confederated 
for national defence. They have stood the shock of four hundred 
years : that country has enjoyed internal tranquillity most of that 
long period. Their dissensions have been, comparatively to those 
of other countries, very few. What has passed in the neighbor- 
ing countries? Wars, dissensions, and intrigues — Germany involv- 
ed in the most deplorable civil w^ar thirty years successively, con- 
tinually convulsed with intestine divisions, and harassed by foreign 
wars — France with her mighty monarchy perpetually at war. 
Compare the peasants of Switzerland with those of any other 
mighty nation : you will find them far more happy ; for one civil 
war amonff them, there have been five or six anions other nations : 
their attachment to their country, and to freedom, their resolute 
intrepidity in their defence, the consequent security and happiness 
which they have enjoyed, and the respect and awe which these 
things produced in their bordering nations, have signalized those 
republicans. Their valor, sir, has been active ; every thing that 
sets in motion the springs of the human heart, engaged them to 
the protection of their inestimable privileges. They have not only 
secured their own liberty, but have been the arbiters of the fate 
of other people. Here, sir, contemplate the triumph of republi- 
can governments over the pride of monarchy. I acknowledge, 
sir, that the necessity of national defence has prevailed in invigo- 
rating their councils and arms, and has been, in a considerable de- 
gree, the means of keeping these honest people together. But, 
sir, they have had wisdom enough to keep together and render 
themselves formidable. Their heroism is proverbial. They would 
heroically fight for their government and their laws. One of the 
illumined sons of these times w T ould not fight for those objects. 
Those virtuous and simple people have not a mighty and splendid 
president, nor enormously expensive navies and armies to support. 
No, sir, those brave republicans have acquired their reputation no 
less by their undaunted intrepidity, than by the wisdom of their 
frugal and economical policy. Let us follow their example, and 
be equally happy. The honorable member advises us to adopt a 
measure which will destroy our bill of rights ; for, after hearing 
his picture of nations, and his reasons for abandoning all the pow 

H 



58 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



ers retained to the states by the confederation, I am more firmly 
persuaded of the impropriety of adopting this new plan in its 
present shape. 

I had doubts of the power of those who went to the conven- 
tion ; but now we are possessed of it, let us examine it. When we 
trusted the great object of revising the confederation to the great- 
est, the best and most enlightened of our citizens, we thought 
their deliberations would have been solely confined to that revision. 
Instead of this, a new system, totally different in its nature, and 
vesting the most extensive powers in congress, is presented. Will 
the ten men you are to send to congress be more worthy than 
those seven were ? If power grew so rapidly in their hands, what 
may it not do in the hands of others ? If those who go from this 
state will find power accompanied with temptation, our situation 
must be truly critical. When about forming a government, if we 
mistake the principles, or commit any other error, the very cir- 
cumstance promises that power will be abused. The greatest 
caution and circumspection are therefore necessary ; nor does this 
proposed system, in its investigation here, deserve the least 
charity. 

The honorable member says, that the national government is 
without energy. 1 perfectly agree with him ; and when he cried 
out union, I agreed with him ; but I tell him not to mistake the 
end for the means. The end is union ; the most capital means, I 
suppose, are an army and navy : on a supposition, I will acknowl- 
edge this : still the bare act of agreeing to that paper, though it 
may have an amazing influence, will not pay our millions. There 
must be things to pay debts. What these things are, or how they 
are to be produced, must be determined by our political wisdom 
and economy. 

The honorable gentleman alleges, that previous amendments 
will prevent the junction of our riches from producing great profits 
and emoluments, (which would enable us to to pay our public 
debts), by excluding us from the union. I believe, sir, that a 
previous ratification of a system notoriously and confessedly defec- 
tive, will endanger our riches ; our liberty ; our all. Its defects 
are acknowledged ; they cannot be denied. The reason offered 
by the honorable gentleman for adopting this defective system, 
is the adoption by eight states. I say, sir, that, if we present noth- 
ing but what is reasonable in the shape of amendments, they will 
receive us. Union is as necessary for them as for us. Will they 
then be so unreasonable as not to join us ? If such be their dis- 
position, I am happy to know it in time. 

The honorable member then observed, that nations will expend 
millions for commercial advantages ; that is, they will deprive you 
of every advantage if they can. Apply this another way. Their 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



59 



cheaper way, instead of laying out millions in making war upon 
you. will be to corrupt your senators. I know that if they be not 
above all price, they may make a sacrifice of our commercial in- 
terests. They may advise your president to make a treaty that 
will not only sacrifice all your commercial interests, but throw 
prostrate vour bill of rights. Does he fear that their ships will 
outnumber curs on the ocean, or that nations, whose interests come 
in contrast with ours, in the progress of their guilt, will perpetrate 
:he vilest expedients to exclude us from a participation in com- 
mercial advantages ? Does he advise us, in order to avoid this 
evil, to adopt a constitution which will enable such nations to ob- 
tain their ends by the more easy mode of contaminating the prin- 
ciples of our senators ? Sir. if our senators will not be corrupted, 
it will be because they will be good men, and not because the 
constitution provides against corruption ; for there is no real check 
secured in it, and the most abandoned and profligate acts may with 
impunity be committed by them. 

With respect to Maryland, what danger from thence ? I know 
none. I have not heard of any hostility premeditated or commit- 
ted. Nine tenths of the people have not heard of it. Those who 
are so happy as to be illumined, have not informed their fellow- 
citizens of it. I am so valiant as to say, that no danger can come 
from that source, sufficient to make me abandon my republican 
principles. The honorable gentleman ought to have recollected, 
that there were no tyrants in America, as there are in Europe : 
the citizens of republican borders are only terrible to tyrants: in- 
stead of being dangerous to one another, they mutually support 
one another's liberties. We might be confederated with the 
adopting states, without ratifying this system. No form of govern- 
ment renders a people more formidable. A confederacy of states 
joined together becomes strong as the United Netherlands. The 
government of Holland (execrated as it is) proves that the pres- 
ent confederation is adequate to every purpose of human associ- 
ation. There are seven provinces confederated together for along 
time, containing numerous opulent cities, and many of the finest 
ports in the world. The recollection of the situation of that coun- 
try would make me execrate monarchy. The singular felicity and 
success of that people are unparalleled : freedom has done mira- 
cle- there in reclaiming land from the ocean. It is the richest spot 
on the face of the globe. Have they no men or money ? Have 
they no fleets or armies ? Have they no arts or sciences among 
them ? How did they repel the attacks of the greatest nations in 
the world? How have they acquired their amazing influence and 
power? Did they consolidate government, to effect these pur- 
poses, as we do ? No, sir ; they have triumphed over every obsta 
cle and difficulty, and have arrived at the summit of political fell 



60 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



city, and of uncommon opulence, by means of a confederacy ; that 
very government which gentlemen affect to despise. They have, 
sir, avoided a consolidation as the greatest of evils. They have 
lately, it is true, made one advance to that fatal progression. 
This misfortune burst on them by iniquity and artifice. That 
stadtholder, that executive magistrate, contrived it, in conjunction 
with other European nations. It was not the choice of the peo- 
ple. Was it owing to his energy that this happened ? If two 
provinces have paid nothing, what have not the rest done? And 
have not these two provinces made other exertions ? Ought they , 
to avoid this inconvenience, to have consolidated their differ- 
ent states, and have a ten miles square ? Compare that little 
spot, nurtured by liberty, with the fairest country in the world. 
Does not Holland possess a powerful navy and army, and a full 
treasury ? They did not acquire these by debasing the principles 
and trampling on the rights of their citizens. Sir, they acquired 
these by their industry, economy, and by the freedom of their 
government. Their commerce is the most extensive in Europe : 
their credit is unequalled ; their felicity will be an eternal monu- 
ment of the blessings of liberty ; every nation in Europe is taught 
by them what they are, and what they ought to be. The con- 
trast between those nations and this happy people is the most 
splendid spectacle for republicans ; the greatest cause of exulta- 
tion and triumph to the sons of freedom. While other nations, 
precipitated by the rage of ambition or folly, have, in the pursuit 
of the most magnificent projects, rivetted the fetters of bondage 
on themselves and their descendants, these republicans have secur- 
ed their political happiness and freedom. Where is there a nation 
to be compared to them? Where is there now, or where was 
there ever a nation, of so small a territory, and so few in number, 
so powerful, so wealthy, so happy ? What is the cause of this 
superiority ? Liberty, sir ; the freedom of their government. 
Though they are now unhappily in some degree consolidated, yet 
they have my acclamations, when put in contrast with those 
millions of their fellow-men who lived and died slaves. The dan- 
gers of a consolidation ought to be guarded against in this country. 
I shall exert my poor talents to ward them off. Dangers are to 
be apprehended in whatever manner we proceed ; but those of a 
consolidation are the most destructive. Let us leave no expedi- 
ent untried to secure happiness ; but whatever be cur decision, 
I am consoled, if American liberty will remain entire, only for 
half a century ; and I trust that mankind in general, and our pos- 
terity in particular, will be compensated for every anxiety we 
now feel. 

Another gentleman tells us, that no incovenience will result 
from the exercise of the power of taxation by the general govern- 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



61 



merit; that two shillings out of ten may be saved by the Jmpost ; 
and that four shillings may be paid to the federal collector, and 
four to the state collector. A change of government will not pay 
money. If from the probable amount of the impost, you take the 
enormous and extravagant expenses, which will certainly attend 
the support of this great consolidated government, I believe you 
will find no reduction of the public burdens by this new system. 
The splendid maintenance of the president and of the members 
of both houses'; and the salaries and fees of the swarm of officers 
and dependants on the government, will cost this continent im- 
mense sums. Double sets of collectors will double the expense. 
To these are to be added oppressive excisemen and custom-house 
officers. Sir, the people have an hereditary hatred to custom-house 
officers. The experience of the mother country leads me to de- 
test them. They have introduced their baneful influence into the 
administration, and destroyed one of the most beautiful systems 
that ever the world saw. Our forefathers enjoyed liberty there, 
while that system was in its purity ; but it is now contaminated by 
influence of every kind. 

The style of the government (we the people) was introduced, 
perhaps, to recommend it to the people at large ; to those citizens 
who are to be levelled and degraded to the lowest degree, who are 
likened to a herd, and who, by the operation of this blessed sys- 
tem, are to be transformed from respectable, independent citizens, 
to abject, dependent subjects or slaves. The honorable gentleman 
has anticipated what we are to be reduced to, by degradingly 
assimilating our citizens to a herd. 

[Here Mr. Randolph rose, and declared that he did not use 
that word to excite any odium, but merely to convey the idea of 
a multitude.] 

Mr. Henry replied, that it made a deep impression on his mind, 
and that he verily believed, that system would operate as he had 
said. [He then continued] — I will exchange that abominable 
word for requisitions ; requisitions, which gentlemen affect to de- 
spise, have nothing degrading in them. On this depends our po- 
litical prosperity. I never will give up that darling word, requisi- 
tions ; my country may give it up ; a majority may wrest it from 
me, but I will never give it up till in my grave. Requisitions are 
attended with one singular advantage. They are attended by de- 
liberation. They secure to the states the benefit of correcting op- 
pressive errors. If our assembly thought requisitions erroneous, 
if they thought the demand was too great, they might at least sup- 
plicate congress to reconsider, that it was a little too much. The 
power of direct taxation was called by the honorable gentleman 
the soul of the government : another gentleman called it the 
lungs of the government. We all agree, that it is the most 
6 



62 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



important part of the body politic. If the power of raising money 
be necessary for the general government, it is no less so for the 
states. If money be the vitals of congress, is it not precious for 
those individuals from whom it is to be taken ? Must I give my 
soul, my lungs, to congress? Congress must have our souls; 
the state must have our souls. This is dishonorable and disgrace- 
ful. These two coordinate, interfering, unlimited powers of har- 
assing the community, are unexampled — unprecedented in history: 
they are the visionary projects of modern politicians : tell me not 
of imaginary means, but of reality : this political solecism will 
never tend to the benefit of the community. It will be as op- 
pressive in practice as it is absurd in theory. If you part from 
this, which the honorable gentleman tells you is the soul of con- 
gress, you will be inevitably ruined. I tell you, they shall not 
have the soul of Virginia. They tell us, that one collector may 
collect the federal and state taxes. The general government being 
paramount to the state legislatures, if the sheriff is to collect for 
both — his right hand for the congress, his left for the state — his 
right hand being paramount over the left, his collections will go to 
congress. We will have the rest. Deficiencies in collections will 
always operate against the states. Congress being the paramount, 
supreme power, must not be disappointed. Thus congress will 
have an unlimited, unbounded command over the soul of this 
commonwealth. After satisfying their uncontrolled demands, 
what can be left for the states ? Not a sufficiency even to defray 
the expense of their internal administration. They must therefore 
glide imperceptibly and gradually out of existence. This, sir, 
must naturally terminate in a consolidation. If this will do for 
other people, it never will do for me. 

If we are to have one representative for every thirty thousand 
souls, it must be by implication. The constitution does not posi- 
tively secure it. Even say it is a natural implication, why not 
give us a right to that proportion in express terms, in language 
that could not admit of evasions or subterfuges ? If they can use 
implication for us, they can also use implication against us. We 
are giving power ; they are getting power : judge, then, on which 
side the implication will be used. When we once put it in their 
option to assume constructive power, danger will follow. Trial 
by jury, and liberty of the press, are also on this foundation of 
implication. If they encroach on these rights, and you give your 
implication for a plea, you are cast ; for they will be justified by 
Ihe last part of it, which gives them full power " to make all 
laws which shall be necessary and proper to carry their powers 
into execution." Implication is dangerous, because it is unbound- 
ed : if it be admitted at all, and no limits be prescribed, it admits 
of the utmost extension. They say, that every thing that is not 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



63 



given is retained. The reverse of the proposition is true by im- 
plication. They do not carry their implication so far when th-ey 
speak of the general welfare. No implication when the sweeping 
clause comes. Implication is only necessary when the existence 
of privileges is in dispute. The existence of powers is sufficient- 
ly established. If we trust our dearest rights to implication, we 
shall be in a very unhappy situation. 

Implication in England has been a source of dissension. There 
has been a war of implication between the king and people. For 
one hundred years did the mother country struggle under the un- 
certainty of implication. The people insisted that their rights 
were implied : the monarch denied the doctrine. Their bill of 
rights in some degree terminated the dispute. By a bold implica- 
tion, they said they had a right to bind us in all cases whatsoever. 
This constructive power we opposed, and successfully. Thirteen 
or fourteen years ago, the most important thing that could be 
thought of, was to exclude the possibility of construction and im- 
plication. These, sir, were then deemed perilous. The first 
thing that was thought of, was a bill of rights. We were not 
satisfied with your constructive argumentative rights. 

[Mr. Henry on the 9th resumed the speech which had been in- 
terrupted by an adjournment.] 1 find myself again, Mr. Chairman, 
constrained to trespass on the patience of this committee. I wish 
there was a prospect of union in our sentiments ; so much time 
would not then be taken up. But when I review the magnitude 
of the subject under consideration, and of the dangers which ap- 
pear to me in this new plan of government, and compare thereto 
my poor abilities to secure our rights, it will take much more time, 
in my poor, unconnected way, to traverse the objectionable parts 
of it ; there are friends here who will be abler than myself to 
make good these objections which to us appear well founded. If 
we recollect, on last Saturday, I made some observations on some 
of those dangers, which these gentlemen would fain persuade us 
hang over the citizens of this commonwealth, to induce us to 
change the government, and adopt the new plan. Unless there 
be great and awful dangers, the change is dangerous, and the ex- 
periment ought not to be made. In estimating the magnitude of 
these dangers, we are obliged to take a most serious view of them, 
to feel them, to handle them, and to be familiar with them. It is 
not sufficient to feign mere imaginary dangers : there must be a 
dreadful reality. The great question between us is, Does that re- 
ality exist? These dangers are partially attributed to bad laws, 
execrated by the community at large. It is said the people wish 
to change the government. I should be happy to meet them on 
that ground. Should the people wish to change it, we should be* 



64 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



innocent of the dangers. It is a fact that the people do not wish 
to change their government. How am I to prove it ? It will rest 
on my bare assertion, unless supported by an internal conviction in 
men's breasts. My poor say-so is a mere non-entity. But, sir, I 
am persuaded that four fifths of the people of Virginia must have 
amendments to the new plan, to reconcile them to a change of 
their government. Our assertions form but a slippery foundation 
for the people to rest their political salvation on. No government 
can flourish unless it be founded on the affection of the people. 
Unless gentlemen can be sure, that this new system is founded on 
that ground, they ought to stop their career. 

I will not repeat what the gentlemen say, but will mention one 
thing. There is a dispute between us and the Spaniards, about 
the right of navigating the Mississippi. This dispute has sprung 
from the federal government. I wish a great deal to be said on 
this subject. I wish to know the origin and progress of the busi- 
ness, as it would probably unfold great dangers. In my opinion, 
the preservation of that river calls for our most serious considera- 
tion. It has been agitated in congress. Seven states have voted 
so as that it is known to the Spaniards, that, under our existing sys- 
tem, the Mississippi shall be taken from them. Seven states wish- 
ed to relinquish this river to them. The six Southern States 
opposed it. Seven states not being sufficient to convey it away, 
it remains now ours. If I am wrong, there are a number on this 
floor who can contradict the facts ; I will readily retract. This 
new government, I conceive, will enable those states, who have 
already discovered their inclination that way, to give away this 
river. Will the honorable gentleman advise us to relinquish this 
inestimable navigation, and place formidable enemies to our backs ? 
This weak, this poor confederation cannot secure us. We are re- 
solved to take shelter under the shield of federal authority in 
America. The southern parts of America have been protected 
by that weakness so much execrated. I hope this will be ex- 
plained. I was not in congress when these transactions took 
place. I may not have stated every fact. I may have misrepre- 
sented matters. I hope to be fully acquainted with every thing- 
relative to the subject. Let us hear how the great and im- 
portant right of navigating that river has been attended to ; and 
whether I am mistaken in my opinion, that federal measures will 
lose it to us forever. If a bare majority of congress can make 
laws, the situation of our western citizens is dreadful. 

We are threatened with danger for the non-payment of the 
debt due to France. We have information from an illustrious 
citizen of Virginia, who is now in Paris, which disproves the sug- 
gestions of such danger. This citizen has not been in the airy 
regions of theoretic speculation ; our ambassador is this worthy 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



65 



citizen. The ambassador of the United States of America is not 
so despised as the honorable gentleman would make us believe. 
A servant of a republic is as much respected as that of a monarch. 
The honorable gentleman tells us, that hostile fleets are to be sent 
to make reprisals upon us ; our ambassador tells you that the king 
of France has taken into consideration, to enter into commercial 
regulations on reciprocal terms with us, which will be of peculiar 
advantage to us. Does this look like hostility ? I might go fur- 
ther ; I might say, not from public authority, but good information -, 
that his opinion is, that you reject this government. His charac- 
ter and abilities are in the highest estimation ; he is well acquaint- 
ed, in every respect, with this country ; equally so with the policy 
of the European nations. This illustrious citizen advises you to 
reject this government, till it be amended. His sentiments coin- 
cide entirely with ours. His attachment to, and services done for, 
this country are well known. At a great distance from us, he re- 
members and studies our happiness. Living amidst splendor and 
dissipation, he thinks yet of bills of rights — thinks of those little 
despised things called maxims. Let us follow the sage advice of 
this common friend of our happiness. It is little usual for nations 
to send armies to collect debts. The house of Bourbon, that great 
friend of America, will never attack her for the unwilling delay of 
payment. Give me leave to say that Europe is too much en- 
gaged about objects of greater importance to attend to us. On 
that great theatre of the world, the little American matters vanish. 
Do you believe, that the mighty monarch of France, beholding the 
greatest scenes that ever engaged the attention of a prince of that 
country, will divert himself from those important objects, and now 
call for a settlement of accounts with America ? This proceeding is 
not warranted by good sense. The friendly disposition to us, and 
the actual situation of France, render the idea of danger from that 
quarter absurd. Would this countryman of ours be fond of advi- 
sing us to a measure which he knew to be dangerous — and can it 
be reasonably supposed, that he can be ignorant of any premedi- 
tated hostility against this country? The- honorable gentleman 
may suspect the account ; but I will do our friend the justice to say 
that he would warn us of any danger from France. 

Do you suppose the Spanish monarch will risk a contest 'with 
the United States, when his feeble colonies are exposed to them ? 
Every advance the people here make to the westward, makes him 
tremble for Mexico and Peru. Despised as we are among ourselves 
under our present government, we are terrible to that monarchy. 
If this be not a fact, it is generally said so. 

We are in the next place frightened by dangers from Holland. 
We must change our government to escape the wrath of that re- 
public. Holland groans under a government like this new one 
6* I 



66 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



A stadtholder, sir, a Dutch president, has brought on that country 
miseries which will not permit them to collect debts with fleets or 
armies. The wife of a Dutch stadtholder brought one hundred 
thousand men against that republic, and prostrated all opposition. 
This president will bring miseries on us like those of Holland. 
Such is the condition of European affairs, that it would be unsafe 
for them to send fleets or armies to collect debts. But here, sir, 
they make a transition to objects of another kincL We are pre- 
sented with dangers of a very uncommon nature. I am not ac- 
quainted with the arts of painting. Some gentlemen have a pecu- 
liar talent for them. They are practised with great ingenuity on 
this occasion. As a counterpart to what we have already been in- 
timidated with, we are told, that some lands have been sold which 
cannot be found ; and that this will bring war on this country. 
Here the picture will not stand examination. Can it be supposed, 
that if a few land speculators and jobbers have violated the prin- 
ciples of probity, that it will involve this country in war? Is 
there no redress to be otherwise obtained, even admitting the de- 
linquents and sufferers to be numerous ? When gentlemen are 
thus driven to produce imaginary dangers, to induce this conven- 
tion to assent to this change, I am sure it will not be uncandid to 
say, that the change itself is really dangerous. Then the Mary- 
land compact is broken, and will produce perilous consequences. 
I see nothing very terrible in this. The adoption of the new sys- 
tem will not remove the evil. Will they forfeit good neighbor- 
hood with us, because the compact is broken ? Then the disputes 
concerning the Carolina line are to involve us in dangers. A 
strip of land running from the westward of the Allegany to the 
Mississippi, is the subject of this pretended dispute. I do not 
know the length or breadth of this disputed spot. Have they not 
regularly confirmed our right to it, and relinquished all claims to it ? 
I can venture to pledge that the people of Carolina will never 
disturb us. The strength of this despised country has settled an 
immense tract of country to the westward. Give me leave to re- 
mark, that the honorable gentleman's observations on our frontiers, 
north and south, east and west, are all inaccurate. 

Will Maryland fight against this country for seeking amend- 
ments ? Were there not sixty members in that state who went in 
quest of amendments ? Sixty against eight or ten were in favor 
of pursuing amendments. Shall they fight us for doing what they 
themselves have done? They have sought amendments, but dif- 
ferently from the manner in which 1 wish amendments to be got. 
The honorable gentleman may plume himself on this difference. 
Will they fight us for this dissimilarity? Will they fight us for 
seeking the object they seek themselves ? When they do, it will 
be time for me to hold my peace. Then, sir, comes Pennsylva- 



TflE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



67 



nia, in terrible array. Pennsylvania is to go in conflict with Vir- 
ginia. Pennsylvania has been a good neighbor heretofore. She 
is federal — something terrible : Virginia cannot look her in the 
face. If we sufficiently attend to the actual situation of things, 
we will conclude that Pennsylvania will do what we do. A num- 
ber of that country are strongly opposed to it. Many of them 
have lately been convinced of its fatal tendency. They are dis- 
gorged of their federalism. I beseech you to bring this matter 
home to vourselves. Was there a possibility for the people of 
that state to know the reasons of adopting that system, or under- 
stand its principles, in so very short a period after its formation ? 
This is the middle of June. Those transactions happened last 
August. The matter was circulated by every effort of industry, 
and the most precipitate measures taken to hurry the people into 
an adoption. Yet now, after having had several months since to 
investigate it, a very large part of this community — a very great 
majority of this community do not understand it. I have heard 
gentlemen of respectable abilities declare that they did not under- 
stand it. If, after great pains, men of high learning, who have re- 
ceived the aid of a regular education, do not understand it ; if the 
people of Pennsylvania understood it in so short a time, it must 
have been from intuitive understandings and uncommon acuteness 
of perception. Place yourselves in their situation ; would you 
fight your neighbors for considering this great and awful matter? 
If you wish for real amendments, such as the security of the trial 
by jury, it will reach the hearts of the people of that state. 
Whatever may be the disposition of the aristocratical politicians of 
that country, I know there are friends of human nature in that 
state. If so, they will never make war on those who make pro- 
fessions of what they are attached to themselves. 

As to the danger arising from borderers, it is mutual and recip- 
rocal. If it be dangerous for Virginia, it is equally so for them. 
It will be their true interest to be united with us. The danger of 
our being their enemies, will be a prevailing argument in our 
favor. It will be as powerful to admit us into the union, as a vote 
of adoption, without previous amendments, could possibly be. 

Then the savage Indians are to destroy us. We cannot look 
them in the face. The danger is here divided ; they are as ter- 
rible to the other states as to us : but, sir, it is well known that we 
have nothing to fear from them. Our back settlers are consider- 
ably stronger than they, and their superiority increases daily. 
Suppose the states to be confederated all around us, what we want 
in number we shall make up otherwise. Our compact situation 
and natural strength will secure us. But to avoid all dangers, we 
must take shelter under the federal government. Nothing gives 
a decided importance but this federal government. You will sip 



68 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



sorrow, according to the vulgar phrase, if you want any other se- 
curity than the laws of Virginia. 

A number of characters of the greatest eminence in this coun- 
try object to this government for its consolidating tendency. This 
is not imaginary. It is a formidable reality. If consolidation 
proves to be as mischievous to this country as it has been to other 
countries, what will the poor inhabitants of this country do ? This 
government will operate like an ambuscade. It will destroy the 
state governments and swallow up the liberties of the people, 
without giving them previous notice. If gentlemen are willing to 
run the hazard, let them run it ; but I shall exculpate myself by 
my opposition and monitory warnings within these walls. But 
then comes paper money. We are at peace on this subject. 
Though this is a thing which that mighty federal convention had 
no business with, yet I acknowledge that paper money would be 
the bane of this country. I detest it. Nothing can justify a 
people in resorting to it, but extreme necessity. It is at rest, 
however, in this commonwealth. It is no longer solicited- or 
advocated. 

Sir, I ask you and every other gentleman who hears me, if he 
can restrain his indignation at a system which takes from the state 
legislatures the care and preservation of the interests of the peo- 
ple ; one hundred and eighty representatives, the choice of the 
people of Virginia, cannot be trusted with their interests. They 
are a mobbish, suspected herd. This country has not virtue 
enough to manage its own internal interests. These must be re- 
ferred to the chosen ten. If we cannot be trusted with the private 
contracts of the citizens, we must be depraved indeed. If he can 
prove, that, by one uniform system of abandoned principles, the 
legislature has betrayed the rights of the people, then let us seek 
another shelter. So degrading an indignity — so flagrant an out- 
rage on the states — so vile a suspicion — is humiliating to my mind 
and many others. 

Will the adoption of this new plan pay our debts ? This, sir, 
is a plain question. It is inferred, that our grievances are to be 
redressed, and the evils of the existing system to be removed by 
the new constitution. Let me inform the honorable gentleman, 
that no nation ever paid its debts by a change of government, 
without the aid of industry. You never will pay your debts but 
by a radical change of domestic economy. At present you buy 
too much, and make too little to pay. Will this new system pro- 
mote manufactures, industry and frugality ? If, instead of this, 
your nopes and designs will be disappointed, you relinquish a great 
deal, and hazard infinitely more for nothing. Will it enhance the 
value of your lands ? Will it lessen your burdens ? Will your 
.ooms and wheels go to work by the act of adoption ? If it will, 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



69 



in its consequences, produce these things, it will consequently pro- 
duce a reform, and enable you to pay your debts. Gentlemen 
must prove it. I am a skeptic — an infidel on this point. I can- 
not conceive that it will have these happy consequences. I can- 
not confide in assertions and allegations. The evils that attend 
as lie in extravagance and want of industry, and can only be re- 
moved by assiduity and economy. Perhaps we shall be told by 
gentlemen that these things will happen, because the administration 
is to be taken from us and placed in the hands of the luminous 
few, who will pay different attention, and be more studiously care- 
ful than we can be supposed to be. 

With respect to the economical operation of the new govern- 
ment, I will only remark that the national expenses will be in- 
creased — if not doubled, it will approach it very near. I might, 
without incurring the imputation of illiberality or extravagance, 
say, that the expense will be multiplied tenfold. I might tell you 
of a numerous standing army ; a great, powerful navy ; a long and 
rapacious train of officers and dependants, independent of the 
president, senators and representatives, whose compensations are 
without limitation. How are our debts to be discharged unless 
the taxes are increased, when the expenses of government are so 
greatly augmented ? The defects of this system are so numerous 
and palpable, and so many states object to it, that no union can be 
expected unless it be amended. Let us take a review of the facts. 
New Hampshire and Rhode Island have rejected it. They have 
refused to become federal. New York and North Carolina are 
reported to be strongly against it. From high authority, give me 
leave to tell, that New York is in high opposition. Will any gen- 
tleman say that North Carolina is not against it ? They may say 
so ; but I say that the adoption of it in those two states amounts 
to entire uncertainty. The system must be amended before these 
four states will accede to it. Besides, there are several other 
states who are dissatisfied, and wish alterations. Massachusetts 
has, in decided terms, proposed amendments ; but by her previous 
ratification, has put the cart before the horse. Maryland institu- 
ted a committee to propose amendments. It then appears that 
two states have actually refused to adopt — two of those who have 
adopted have a desire of amending. And there is a probability 
of its being rejected by New York and North Carolina. The 
other states have acceded without proposing amendments. With 
respect to them, local circumstances have, in my judgment, oper- 
ated to produce its unconditional, instantaneous adoption. The 
locality of the seat of government, ten miles square, and the seat 
of justice, with all their concomitant emoluments, operated so 
powerfully with the first adopting state, that it was adopted with- 
out taking time to reflect. We are told that numerous advantage* 



70 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



will result from the concentration of the wealth and grandeur of 
the United States in one happy spot, to those who will reside in 
or near it. Prospects of profit and emoluments have a powerful 
influence on the human mind. We, sir, have no such projects as 
that of a grand seat of government for thirteen states, and perhaps 
for one hundred states hereafter. Connecticut and New Jersey 
have their localities also. New York lies between them.' They 
have no ports, and are not importing states. New York is an im- 
porting state, and, taking advantage of its situation, makes them 
pay duties for all the articles of their consumption : thus, these 
two states, being obliged to import all they want, through the me- 
dium of New York, pay the particular taxes of that state. I know 
the force and effect of reasoning of this sort by experience. When 
the impost was proposed some years ago, those states which were 
not importing states readily agreed to concede to congress the 
power of laying an impost on all goods imported for the use of the 
continental treasury. Connecticut and New Jersey, therefore, are 
influenced by advantages of trade in their adoption. The amounts 
of all imposts are to go into one common treasury. This favors 
adoption by the non-importing states ; as they participate in the 
profits which were before exclusively enjoyed by the importing 
states. Notwithstanding this obvious advantage to Connecticut, 
there is a formidable minority there against it. After taking this 
general review of American affairs, as respecting federalism, will 
the honorable gentleman tell me that he can expect union in 
America? When so many states are pointedly against it; when 
two adopting states have pointed out, in express terms, their dis- 
satisfaction as it stands ; and when there is so respectable a body 
of men discontented in every state, can the honorable gentleman 
promise himself harmony, of which he is so fond? If he can, I 
cannot. To me it appears unequivocally clear, that we shall not 
have that harmony. If it appears to the other states, that our 
aversion is founded on just grounds, will they not be willing to in- 
dulge us? If disunion will really result from Virginia's proposing 
amendments, will they not wish the reestablishment of the union, 
and admit us, if not on such terms as we prescribe, yet on advan- 
tageous terms ? Is not union as essential to their happiness as to 
ours ? Sir, without a radical alteration, the states will never be 
embraced in one federal pale. If you attempt to force it down 
men's throats, and call it union, dreadful consequences must follow. 

He has said a great deal about disunion and the dangers that are 
to arise from it. When we are on the subject of union and dan- 
gers, let me ask, How will his present doctrine hold with what has 
happened? Is it consistent with that noble and disinterested con- 
duct which he displayed on a former occasion ? Did he not tell 
us that he withheld his signature ? Where then were the dangers 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 71 

which now appear to him so formidable ? He saw all America 
eajjerlv conBdirig that the result of their deliberations would remove 
their distresses. He saw all America acting under the impulses 
of hope, expectation and anxiety, arising from their situation and 
their partiality for the members of that convention : yet his en- 
lightened mind, knowing that system to be defective, magnani- 
mously and nobly refused its approbation. He was not led by the 
illumined — the illustrious few. He was actuated by the dictates 
of his own judgment ; and a better judgment than I can form. He 
did not stand out of the way of information. He must have been 
possessed of every intelligence. What alteration have a few 
months brought about ? The internal difference between right 
and wrong does not fluctuate. It is immutable. I ask this ques- 
tion as a public man, and out of no particular view. I wish, as 
such, to consult every source of information, to form my judgment 
on so awful a question. I had the highest respect for the honor- 
able gentleman's abilities. I considered his opinion as a great au- 
thority. He taught me, sir, in despite of the approbation of that 
great federal convention, to doubt of the propriety of that system. 
When I found my honorable friend in the number of those who 
doubted, I began to doubt also. I coincided with him in opinion. 
I shall be a stanch and faithful disciple of his. I applaud that 
magnanimity which led him to withhold his signature. If he 
think? now differently, he is as free as I am. Such is my sit- 
uation, that, as a poor individual, I look for information every 
where. 

This government is so new it wants a name. I wish its other 
novelties were as harmless as this. He told us we had an Amer- 
ican dictator in the year 1731. We never had an American pres- 
ident. In making a dictator, we follow the example of the most 
glorious, magnanimous and skilful nations. In great dangers this 
power has been given. Rome had furnished us with an illustrious 
example. America found a person worthy of that trust : she 
looked to Virginia for him. We gave a dictatorial power to hands 
that used it gloriously, and which were rendered more glorious 
by surrendering it up. Where is there a breed of such dictators? 
Shall we find a set of American presidents of such a breed ? Will 
the American president come and lay prostrate at the feet of con- 
gress his laurels ? I fear there are few men who can be trusted 
on that head. The glorious republic of Holland has erected mon- 
uments to her warlike intrepidity and valor : yet she is now totally 
ruined by a stadtholder, a Dutch president. The destructive 
wars into which that nation has been plunged, have since involved 
her in ambition. The glorious triumphs of Blenheim and Ra- 
millies were not so conformable to the genius, nor so much to the* 
true interest of the republic, as those numerous and useful canal* 



72 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



and dikes, and other objects at which ambition spurns. That re- 
public has, however, by the industry of its inhabitants and policy 
of its magistrates, suppressed the ill effects of ambition. Notwith- 
standing two of their provinces have paid nothing, yet I hope the 
example of Holland will tell us, that we can live happily without 
changing our present despised government. Cannot people be as 
happy under a mild as under an energetic government? Cannot 
content and felicity be enjoyed in a republic as well as in a mon- 
archy, because there are whips, chains and scourges used in the 
latter? If I am not as rich as my neighbor, if I give my mite, 
my all, republican forbearance will say. that it is sufficient. So 
said the honest confederates of Holland : " You are poor ; we 
are rich. We will go on and do better, far better, than be under 
an oppressive government." Far better will it be for us to con- 
tinue as we are, than go under that tight, energetic government. 
I am persuaded of what the honorable gentleman says, that sepa- 
rate confederacies will rain us. In my judgment, they are evils 
never to be thought of till a people are driven by necessity. When 
he asks my opinion of consolidation, of one power to reign over 
America with a strong hand, I will tell him, I am persuaded of the 
rectitude of my honorable friend's opinion (Mr. Mason), that one 
government cannot reign over so extensive a country as this is, 
without absolute despotism. Compared to such a consolidation, 
small confederacies are little evils, though they ought to be recur- 
red to but in case of necessity. Virginia and North Carolina are 
despised. They could exist separated from the rest of America. 
Maryland and Vermont were not overrun when out of the confed- 
eracy. Though it is not a desirable object, yet, I trust, that on 
examination it will be found, that Virginia and North Carolina 
would not be swallowed up in case it was necessary for them to be 
joined together. 

When we come to the spirit of domestic peace, the humble 
genius of Virginia has formed a government suitable to the genius 
of her people. I believe the hands that formed the American 
constitution triumph in the experiment. It proves that the man 
who formed it, and perhaps by accident, did what design could not 
do in other parts of the world. After all your reforms in govern- 
ment, unless you consult the genius of the inhabitants, you will 
never succeed ; your system can have no duration. Let me ap- 
peal to the candor of the committee, if the want of money be not 
the source of all our misfortunes. We cannot be blamed for not 
making dollars. This want of money cannot be supplied by 
changes in government. The only possible remedy, as I have be- 
fore asserted, is industry aided by economy. Compare the genius 
of the people with the government of this country. Let me re- 
mark, that it stood the severest conflict during the war to which 



THE FEDERAL CONETITUTION. 



73 



human virtue has ever been called. I call upon every gentleman 
here to declare, whether the king of England had any subjects so 
attached to his family and government — so loyal as we were. 
But the genius of Virginia called us for liberty ; called us from 
those beloved endearments, which, from long habits, we were 
taught to love and revere. We entertained from our earliest in- 
fancy the most sincere regard and reverence for the mother coun- 
try. Our partiality extended to a predilection for her customs, 
habits, manners and laws. Thus inclined, when the deprivation 
of our liberty was attempted, what did we do? What did the 
genius of Virginia tell us? "Sell all and purchase liberty." 
This was a severe conflict. Republican maxims were then es- 
teemed. Those maxims and the genius of Virginia landed you 
safe on the shore of freedom. On this awful occasion, did you 
want a federal government ? Did federal ideas possess your 
minds ? Did federal ideas lead you to the most splendid victo- 
ries ? I must again repeat the favorite idea, that the genius of 
Virginia did, and will again lead us to happiness. To obtain the 
most splendid prize, you did not consolidate. You accomplished 
* the most glorious ends by the assistance of the genius of your 
country. Men were then taught by that genius that they were 
fighting for what was most dear to them. View the most affec- 

o o 

donate father, the most tender mother, operated on by liberty, 
nobly stimulating their sons, their dearest sons, sometimes their 
only son, to advance to the defence of his country. We have 
seen sons of Cincinnatus without splendid magnificence or parade, 
going, with the genius of thej| great progenitor Cincinnatus, to the 
plough — men who served their country without ruining it ; men 
who had served it to the destruction of their private patrimonies ; 
their country owing them amazing amounts, for the payment of 
which no adequate provision was then made. We have seen such 
men throw prostrate their arms at your feet. They did not call 
for those emoluments which ambition presents to some imagina- 
tions. The soldiers who were able to command every thing, in- 
stead of trampling on those laws which they were instituted to de- 
fend, most strictly obeyed them. The hands of justice have not 
been laid on a single American soldier. Brins: them into contrast 
with European veterans — you will see an astonishing superiority 
over the latter. There has been a strict subordination to the 
laws. The honorable gentleman's office gave him an opportunity 
of viewing if the laws were administered so as to prevent riots, 
routs and unlawful assemblies. From his then situation, he could 
have furnished us with the instances in which licentiousness tram- 
pled on the laws. Among all our troubles, we have paid almost 
to the last shilling, for the sake of justice : we have paid as well 
as any state ; I will not say better. To support the general gov 



74 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



ernment and our own legislature ; to pay the interest of the pub- 
lic debts, and defray contingencies, we have been heavily taxed 
To add to these things, the distresses produced by paper money, 
and by tobacco contracts, were sufficient to render any people dis- 
contented. These, sir, were great temptations ; but in the most 
severe conflict of misfortunes, this code of laws — this genius of 
Virginia, call it what you will, triumphed over every thing. 

Why did it please the gentleman, (Mr. Corbin) to bestow such 
epithets on our country ? Have the worms taken possession of the 
wood, that our strong vessel, our political vessel, has sprung a leak ? 
He may know better than I; but I consider such epithets to be the 
most illiberal and unwarrantable aspersions on our laws. The 
system of laws under which we have lived, has been tried and found 
to suit our genius. I trust w T e shall not change this happy system. 
I cannot so easily take leave of an old friend. Till I see him fol- 
lowing after and pursuing other objects, which can pervert the great 
objects of human legislation, pardon me if I withhold my assent. 

Some here speak of the difficulty in forming a new code of laws. 
Young as we were, it was not wonderful if there was a difficulty in 
forming and assimilating one system of laws. I shall be obliged to 
the gentleman, if he would point out those glaring, those great faults. 
The efforts of assimilating our laws to our genius have not been 
found altogether vain. I shall pass over some other circumstances 
which I intended to mention, and endeavor to come to the capital 
objection, which my honorable friend made. My worthy friend 
said, that a republican form of government would not suit a very 
extensive country ; but that if a government w T ere judiciously or- 
ganized, and limits prescribed to it, an attention to these principles 
might render it possible for it to exist in an extensive territory. 
Whoever will be bold to say, that a continent can be governed by 
that system, contradicts all the experience of the world. It is a 
work too great for human wisdom. Let me call for an example. 
Experience has been called the best teacher. I call for an exam- 
ple of a great extent of country, governed by one government, or 
congress, call it what you will. I tell him that a government may 
be trimmed up according to gentlemen's fancy, but it never can 
operate; it will be but very short-lived. However disagreeable it 
may be to lengthen my objections, I cannot help taking notice of 
what the honorable gentleman said. To me it appears that there 
is no check in that government. The president, senators and rep- 
resentatives, all immediately or mediately, are the choice of the 
people. Tell me not of checks on paper ; but tell me of checks 
founded on self-love. The English government is founded on 
self-love. This powerful, irresistible stimulus of self-love has 
saved that government. It has interposed that hereditary nobility 
between the kins: and commons. If the house of lords assists or 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



75 



permits the king to overturn the liberties of the people, the same 
tyranny will destroy them ; they will therefore keep the balance 
in the democratic branch. Suppose they see the commons en- 
croach upon the king : self-love, that great, energetic check, will 
call upon them to interpose ; for, if the king be destroyed, their 
destruction must speedily follow. Here is a consideration which 
prevails in my mind, to pronounce the British government superi- 
or, in this respect, to any government that ever was in any country. 
Compare this with your congressional checks. I beseech gentle- 
men to consider whether they can say, when trusting power, that 
a mere patriotic profession will be equally operative and efficacious, 
as the "check of self-love. In considering the experience of ages, 
is it not seen that fair, disinterested patriotism and professions of 
attachment to rectitude, have never been solely trusted to by an 
enlightened, free people ? If you depend on your president's and 
senators' patriotism, you are gone. Have you a resting-place like 
the British government? Where is the rock of your salvation? 
The real rock of political salvation is self-love, perpetuated from 
age to age in every human breast, and manifested in every action. 
If they can stand the temptations of human nature, you are safe. 
If you have a good president, senators, and representatives, there 
is no danger. But can this be expected from human nature ? 
Without real checks it will not suffice that some of them are good. 
A good president, or senator, or representative, will have a natural 
weakness. Virtue will slumber : the wicked will be continually 
watching: consequently you will be undone. Where are your 
checks ? You have no hereditary nobility — an order of men, to 
w r hom human eyes can be cast up for relief; for, says the constitu- 
tion, there is no title of nobility to be granted ; which, by the by, 
would not have been so dangerous as the perilous cession of pow- 
ers contained in that paper; because, as Montesquieu says, when 
you give titles of nobility, you know what you give ; but when 
you give power, you know not what you give. If you say that, 
out of this depraved mass, you can collect luminous characters, it 
will not avail, unless this luminous breed will be propagated from 
generation to generation ; and even then, if the number of vicious 
characters will preponderate, you are undone. And that this will 
certainly be the case, is, to my mind, perfectly clear. In the 
British government, there are real balances and checks : in this 
system, there are only ideal balances. Till I im convinced that 
there are actual, efficient checks, I will not give my assent to its 
establishment. The president and senators have nothing to lose. 
They have not that interest in the preservation of the government, 
that the king and lords have in England. They will therefore be 
regardless of the interests of the people. The constitution will 



76 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



be as safe with one body as with two. It will answer every pur- 
pose of human legislation. How was the constitution of England 
when only the commons had the power? I need only remark, 
that it was the most unfortunate era when the country returned to 
king, lords and commons, without sufficient responsibility in the 
king. When the commons of England, in the manly language 
which became freemen, said to their king, "You are our servant," 
then the temple of liberty was complete. From that noble source 
have we derived our liberty : that spirit of patriotic attachment to 
one's country, that zeal for liberty, and that enmity to tyranny, 
which signalized the then champions of liberty, we inherit from 
our British ancestors. And I am free to own, that if you cannot 
love a republican government, you may love the British monar- 
chy: for, although the king is not sufficiently responsible, the 
responsibility of his agents, and the efficient checks interposed by 
the British constitution, render it less dangerous than other monar- 
chies, or oppressive tyrannical aristocracies. What are their checks 
of exposing accounts ? Their checks upon paper are inefficient 
and nugatory. Can you search your president's closet? Is this a 
real check ? We ought to be exceedingly cautious in giving up 
this life, this soul — our money — this power of taxation, to congress. 
What powerful check is there here to prevent the most extrava- 
gant and profligate squandering of the public money? What se- 
curity have we in money matters ? Inquiry is precluded by this 
constitution. I never wish to see congress supplicate the states. 
But it is more abhorrent to my mind to give them an unlimited and 
unbounded command over our souls, our lives, our purses, without 
any check or restraint. How are you to keep inquiry alive ? 
how discover their conduct ? We are told by that paper, that a 
regular statement and account of the receipts and expenditures of 
all public money shall be published from time to time. Here is a 
beautiful check ! What time ? Here is the utmost latitude left. 
If those who are in congress please to put that construction upon 
it, the words of the constitution will be satisfied by publishing 
those accounts once in one hundred years. They may publish or 
not, as they please. Is this like the present despised system, 
whereby the accounts are to be published monthly ? 

I come now to speak something of requisitions, which the 
honorable gentleman thought so truly contemptible and disgrace- 
ful. That honorable gentleman, being a child of the revolution, 
must recollect with gratitude the glorious effects of requisitions. 
It is an idea that must be grateful to every American. An English 
army was sent to compel us to pay money contrary to our con- 
sent ; to force us by arbitrary and tyrannical coercion to satisfy 
(heir unbounded demands. We wished to pay with our own con- 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



77 



sent. Rather than pay against our consent, we engaged in that 
bloody contest, which terminated so gloriously. By requisitions 
we pay with our own consent : by their means we have triumphed 
in the most arduous struggle that ever tried the virtue of man. 
We fought then for what we are contending now — to prevent an 
arbitrary deprivation of our property, contrary to our consent and 
inclination. I shall be told, in this place, that those who are to 
tax us are our representatives. To this I answer, that there is no 
real check to prevent their ruining us. There is no actual respon- 
sibility. The only semblance of a check is the negative power 
of not reelecting them. This, sir, is but a feeble barrier, when 
their personal interest, their ambition and avarice come to be put 
in contrast with the happiness of the people. All checks found- 
ed on any thing but self-love, will not avail. This constitution 
reflects, in the most degrading and mortifying manner, on the vir- 
tue, integrity and wisdom of the state legislatures : it presupposes 
that the chosen few w T ho go to congress, will have more upright 
hearts, and more enlightened minds, than those who are members 
of the individual legislatures. To suppose that ten gentlemen 
shall have more real substantial merit than one hundred and 
seventy, is humiliating to the last degree. If, sir, the diminution 
of numbers be an augmentation of merit, perfection must centre 
in one. If you have the faculty of discerning spirits, it is better 
to point out at once the man who has the most illumined qualities. 
If ten men be better than one hundred and seventy, it follows 
of necessity that one is better than ten — the choice is more 
refined. 

Such is the danger of the abuse of implied power, that it would 
be safer at once to have seven representatives, the number to 
which we are now entitled, than depend on the uncertain and am- 
biguous language of that paper. The number may be lessened 
instead of being increased ; and yet by argumentative, construc- 
tive, implied power, the proportion of taxes may continue the 
same or be increased. Nothing is more perilous than constructive 
power, which gentlemen are so willing to trust their happiness to. 

If sheriffs prove now an overmatch for our legislature ; if their 
ingenuity has eluded the vigilance of our laws, how will the mat- 
ter be amended when they come clothed with federal authority ? 
A strenuous argument offered by gentlemen is, that the same 
sheriffs may collect for the continental and state treasuries. I 
have before shown, that this must have an inevitable tendency to 
give a decided preference to the federal treasury in the actual col- 
lections, and to throw all deficiencies on the state. This imagina- 
ry remedy for the evil of congressional taxation, will have another 
oppressive operation. The sheriff comes to-day as a state collect 
7* 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



or — next day he is federal — how are you to fix him ? How will 
it be possible to discriminate oppressions committed in one capaci- 
ty from those perpetrated in the other? Will not his ingenuity 
perplex the simple, honest planter? This will at least involve in 
difficulties those who are unacquainted with legal ingenuity. When 
you fix him, where are you to punish him ? For I suppose they 
will not stay in our courts : they must go to the federal court ; foi 
if I understand that paper right, all controversies arising under that 
constitution, or under the laws made in pursuance thereof, are to 
be tried in that court. When gentlemen told us, that this part 
deserved the least exception, I was in hopes they would prove 
that there was plausibility in their suggestions, and that oppression 
would probably not follow. Are we not told that it shall be trea- 
son to levy war against the United States ? Suppose an insult of- 
fered to the federal laws at an immense distance from Philadel- 
phia ; will this be deemed treason ? And shall a man be dragged 
many hundred miles to be tried as a criminal for having, perhaps 
justifiably, resisted an unwarrantable attack upon his person or 
property ? I am not well acquainted with federal jurisprudence ; 
but it appears to me that these oppressions must result from this 
part of the plan. It is at least doubtful, and where there is even a 
possibility of such evils, they ought to be guarded against. 

There are to be a number of places fitted out for arsenals and 
dock-yards in the different states. Unless you sell to congress 
such places as are proper for these within your state, you will not 
be consistent after adoption ; it results therefore clearly that you 
are to give into their hands all such places as are fit for strong- 
holds. When you have these fortifications and garrisons within 
your state, your legislature will have no power over them, though 
they see the most dangerous insults offered to the people daily. 
They are also to have magazines in each state : these depositories 
for arms, though within the state, will be free from the control of 
its legislature. Are we at last brought to such a humiliating and 
debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our 
own defence ? There is a wide difference between having our 
arms in our own possession and under our own direction, and hav- 
ing them under the management of congress. If our defence be 
the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be 
trusted with more propriety or equal safety to us as in our own ? 
If our legislature be unworthy of legislating for every foot in this 
state, they are unworthy of saying another word. 

The clause which says that congress shall " provide for arming, 
organizing and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part 
of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, 
reserving to the states respectively the appointment of the officers," 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



79 



seemed to put the states in the power of congress. I wished to 
oe informed, if congress neglected to discipline them, whether the 
states were not precluded from doing it. Not being favored with 
a particular answer, I am confirmed in my opinion that the states 
have not the power of disciplining them, without recurring to the 
doctrine of constructive, implied powers. If by implication the 
states may discipline them, by implication also congress may offi- 
cer them ; because, in a partition of power, each has a right to 
come in for part ; and because implication is to operate in favor of 
congress on all occasions, where their object is the extension of 
power, as well as in favor of the states. We have not one fourth 
of the arms that would be sufficient to defend ourselves. The 
power of arming the militia, and the means of purchasing arms, 
are taken from the states by the paramount powers of congress 
If congress will not arm them, they will not be armed at all. 

There have been no instances shown of a voluntary cession of 
power, sufficient to induce me to grant the most dangerous powers : 
a possibility of their future relinquishment will not persuade me to 
yield such powers. 

Congress, by the power of taxation, by that of raising an army , 
and by their control over the militia, have the sword in one hand 
and the purse in the other. Shall we be safe without either? 
Congress have an unlimited power over both : they are entirely 
given up by us. Let him candidly tell me, where and when did 
freedom exist when the sword and purse were given up by the 
people ? Unless a miracle in human affairs interposed, no nation 
ever retained its liberty after the loss of the sword and purse. Can 
you prove, by any argumentative deduction, that it is possible to 
be safe without retaining one of these? If you give them up, you 
are gone. Give us at least a plausible apology why congress 
should keep their proceedings in secret. They have the power 
of keeping them secret as long as they please ; for the provision 
for a periodical publication is too inexplicit and ambiguous to avail 
any thing. The expression, from time to time, as I have more 
than once observed, admits of any extension. They may carry 
on the most wicked and pernicious of schemes under the dark veil 
of secrecy. The liberties of a people never were nor ever will be 
secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed 
from them. The most iniquitous plots may be carried on against 
their liberty and happiness. I am not an advocate for divulging 
indiscriminately all the operations of government, though the prac- 
tice of our ancestors in some degree justifies it. Such transactions 
as relate to military operations or affairs of great consequence, the 
immediate promulgation of which might defeat the interests of the 
community I would not wish to be published till the end which 



so 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



required their secrecy should have been effected. Bat to covet, 
with the veil of secrecy, the common routine of business, is an 
abomination in the eyes of every intelligent man and every friend 
to his country. 

^* ~¥? *j£ 

I appeal to this convention if it would not be better for America 
to take off the veil of secrecy. Look at us — hear our transactions. 
If this had been the language of the federal convention, what 
would have been the result ? Such a constitution would not have 
come out to your utter astonishment, conceding such dangerous 
powers, and recommending secrecy in the future transactions of 
government. I believe it would have given more general satis- 
faction if the proceedings of that convention had not been con- 
cealed from the public eye. This constitution authorizes the same 
conduct. There is not an English feature in it. The transactions 
of congress may be concealed a century from the public consist- 
ently with the constitution. This, sir, is a laudable imitation 
of the transactions of the Spanish treaty. We have not for- 
gotten with what a thick, veil of secrecy those transactions were 
covered. 

We are told that this government, collectively taken, is without 
an example ; that it is national in this part, and federal in that 
part, &ic. We may be amused, if w T e please, by a treatise of po- 
litical anatomy. In the brain it is national : the stamina are fed- 
eral : some limbs are federal, others national. The senators are 
voted for by the state legislatures ; so far it is federal. Individuals 
choose the members of the first branch; here it is national. It is 
federal in conferring general powers, but national in retaining 
them. It is not to be supported by the states — the pockets of 
individuals are to be searched for its maintenance. What signifies 
it to me that you have the most curious anatomical description of 
it in its creation ? To all the common purposes of legislation it is 
a great consolidation of government. You are not to have the 
right to legislate in any but trivial cases : you are not to touch 
private contracts : you are not to have the right of having arms in 
your own defence : you cannot be trusted with dealing out justice 
between man and man. What shall the states have to do ? Take 
care of the poor, repair and make highways, erect bridges, and so 
on and so on. Abolish the state legislatures at once. What pur- 
poses should they be continued for ? Our legislature will indeed 
be a ludicrous spectacle — one hundred and eighty men, marching 
in solemn, farcical procession, exhibiting a mournful proof of the 
lost liberty of their country, without the power of restoring it. 
But. sir, we have the consolation, that it is a mixed government ; 
that is, it may work sorely on your neck, but you will have 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



SI 



some comfort by saying that it was a federal government in its 
origin. 

I beg gentlemen to consider ; lay aside your prejudices — is this 
a federal government ? Is it not a consolidated government for 
every purpose almost? Is the government of Virginia a state 
government after this government is adopted ? I grant that it is 
a republican government ; but for what purposes ? For such 
trivial, domestic considerations as render it unworthy the name of 
a legislature. I shall take leave of this political anatomy by ob- 
serving, that it is the most extraordinary that ever entered into the 
imagination of man. If our political diseases demand a cure, this 
is an unheard-of medicine. The honorable member, I am con- 
vinced, wanted a name for it. Were your health in danger, would 
you take new medicine ? I need not make use of these exclama- 
tions ; for every member in this committee must be alarmed at 
making new and unusual experiments in government. Let us 
have national credit and a national treasury in case of war. You 
never can want national resources in time of war, if the war be a 
national one, if it be necessary, and this necessity be obvious to the 
meanest capacity. The utmost exertions will be used by the peo- 
ple of America in that case. A republic has this advantage over 
a monarchy, that its wars are generally founded on more just 
grounds. A republic can never enter into a war unless it be a 
national war, unless it be approved of, or desired by the whole 
community. Did ever a republic fail to use the utmost resources 
of the community when a war was necessary ? I call for an ex- 
ample. I call also for an example when a republic has been en- 
gaged in a war contrary to the wishes of its people. There are 
thousands of examples where the ambition of its prince has precip- 
itated a nation into the most destructive war. No nation ever 
withheld pow T er when its object was just and right. I will hazard 
an observation : I find fault with the paper before you because the 
same power that declares war has the ability to carry it on. Is it 
so in England ? The king declares war : the house of commons 
gives the means of carrying it on. This is a strong check on the 
king. He will enter into no war that is unnecessary ; for the 
commons, having the power of withholding the means, will exer- 
cise that power, unless the object of the war be for the interest of 
the nation. How is it here ? The congress can both declare war 
and carry it on, and levy your money as long as you have a shil- 
ling to pay. 

1 shall now speak a little of the colonial confederacy which 
was proposed at Albany. Massachusetts did not give her consent 
to the project at Albany so as to consolidate with the other colo- 
nies. Had there been a consolidation at Albany, where would 

L 



82 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



have been their charter ? Would that confederacy have pre- 
served their charter from Britain ? The strength and energy of 
the then designed government would have crushed American op- 
position. 

The American revolution took its origin from the comparative 
weakness of the British government not being concentred in one 
point. A concentration of the strength and interest of the British 
government in one point, would have rendered opposition to its 
tyrannies fruitless. For want of that consolidation do we now 
enjoy liberty, and the privilege of debating at this moment. I am 
pleased with the colonial establishment. The example, which the 
honorable member has produced to persuade us to depart from 
our present confederacy, rivets me to my former opinion, and con- 
vinces me that consolidation must end in the destruction of our 
liberties. 

The honorable gentleman has told us of our ingratitude to 
France. She does not intend to take payment by force. Ingrat- 
itude shall not be laid to my charge. I wish to see the friendship 
between this country and that magnanimous ally perpetuated. 
Requisitions will enable us to pay the debts we owe to France and 
other countries. She does not desire us to go from our beloved 
republican government. The change is inconsistent with our en- 
gagements with those nations. It is cried out that those in oppo- 
sition wish disunion. This is not true. They are the most stren- 
uous friends to it. This government will clearly operate disunion. 
If it be heard on the other side of the Atlantic that you are going 
to disunite and dissolve the confederacy, what says France ? Will 
she be indifferent to an event that will so radically affect her trea- 
ties with us ? Our treaty with her is founded on the confederation 
— we are bound to her as thirteen states confederated. What will 
become of the treaty ? It is said that treaties will be on a better 
footing. How so? Will the president, senate, and house of rep- 
resentatives, be parties to them ? I cannot conceive how the trea- 
ties can be as binding, if the confederacy is dissolved, as they are 
now. Those nations will not continue their friendship then ; they 
will become our enemies. I look on the treaties as the greatest 
pillars of safety. If the house of Bourbon keeps us, we are safe. 
Dissolve that confederacy — who has you? — the British. Feder- 
alism will not protect you from the British. Is a connection with 
that country more desirable ? I was amazed when gentlemen for- 
got the friends of America. 1 hope that this dangerous change 
will not be effected. It is safe for the French and Spaniards that 
we should continue to be thirteen states ; but it is not so that we 
should be consolidated into one government. They have settle 
ments in America ; will they like schemes of popular ambition * 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 83 

i 



Will they not have some serious reflections ? You may tell them 
you have not changed your situation ; but the)?- will not believe 
you. If there be a real check intended to be left on congress, it 
must be left in the state governments. There will be some check 
as long as the judges are incorrupt. As long as they are upright, 
you may preserve your liberty. But what will the judges deter- 
mine when the state and federal authority come to be contrasted ? 
Will your liberty then be secure, when the congressional laws are 
declared paramount to the laws of your state, and the judges are 
sworn to support them ? 

I am constrained to make a few remarks on the absurdity of 
adopting this system, and relying on the chance of getting it amend- 
ed afterwards. When it is confessed to be replete with defects, 
is it not offering to insult your understandings, to attempt to reason 
you out of the propriety of rejecting it, till it be amended ? Does 
it not insult your judgments to tell you — Adopt first and then 
amend ? Is your rage for novelty so great, that you are first to 
sign and seal, and then to retract ? Is it possible to conceive a 
greater solecism ? I am at a loss what to say. You agree to bind 
yourselves hand and foot — for the sake of what ? Of being un- 
bound. You go into a dungeon — for what? To get out. Is 
there no danger, when you go in, that the bolts of federal authori- 
ty shall shut you in? Human nature never will part from power. 
Look for an example of a voluntary relinquishment of power, from 
one end of the globe to another — you will find none. Nine tenths 
of our fellow-men have been, and are now, depressed by the most 
intolerable slavery, in the different parts of the world ; because the 
strong hand of power has bolted them in the dungeon of despot- 
ism. Review the present situation of the nations of Europe, 
which is pretended to be the freest quarter of the globe. Cast 
your eyes on the countries called free there. Look at the country 
from which we are descended, I beseech you ; and although we 
are separated by everlasting, insuperable partitions, yet there are 
some virtuous people there who are friends to human nature and 
liberty. Look at Britain ; see there the bolts and bars of power ; 
see bribery and corruption defiling the fairest fabric that ever hu- 
man nature reared. Can a gentleman who is an Englishman, or 
who is acquainted with the English history, desire to prove these 
evils ? See the efforts of a man descended from a friend of Ameri- 
ca ; see the efforts of that man, assisted even by the king, to make 
reforms. But you find the faults too strong to be amended. 
Nothing but bloody war can alter them. See Ireland : that coun- 
try groaned from century to century, without getting their govern- 
ment amended. Previous adoption was the fashion there. They 
sent for amendments from time to time, but never obtained them. 



84 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



though pressed by the severest oppression, till eighty thousand 
volunteers demanded them sword in hand — till the power of Brit- 
ain was prostrate ; when the American resistance was crowned 
with success. Shall we do so ? If you judge by the experience 
of Ireland, you must obtain the amendments as early as possible. 
But I ask you again, Where is the example that a government was 
amended by those who instituted it? Where is the instance 
of the errors of a government rectified by those who adopted 
them ? 

I shall make a few observations to prove, that the power over 
elections, which is given to congress, is contrived by the federal 
government ; that the people may be deprived of their proper in- 
fluence in the government, by destroying the force and effect of 
their suffrages. Congress is to have a discretionary control over 
the time, place and manner of elections. The representatives are 
to be elected consequently when and where they please. As to 
the time and place, gentlemen have attempted to obviate the objec- 
tion by saying, that the time is to happen once in two years, and 
that the place is to be within a particular district, or in the respec- 
tive counties. But how will they obviate the danger of referring 
the manner of election to congress ? Those illumined genii may 
see that this may not endanger the rights of the people ; but to 
my unenlightened understanding, it appears plain and clear, that it 
will impair the popular weight in the government. Look at the 
Roman history. They had two ways of voting : the one by tribes, 
and the other by centuries. By the former, numbers prevailed : 
in the latter, riches preponderated. According to the mode pre- 
scribed, congress may tell you, that they have a right to make the 
vote of one gentleman go as far as the votes of one hundred pool 
men. The power over the manner admits of the most dangerous 
latitude. They may modify it as they please. They may regu- 
late the number of votes by the quantity of property, without in- 
volving any repugnancy to the constitution. I should not have 
thought of this trick or contrivance, had I not seen how the public 
liberty of Rome was trifled with by the mode of voting by centu- 
ries, whereby one rich man had as many votes as a multitude of 
poor men. The plebeians were trampled on till they resisted. 
The patricians trampled on the liberties of the plebeians, till the 
latter had spirit to assert their right to freedom and equality. The 
result of the American mode of election may be similar. Per- 
haps I shall be told, that I have gone through the regions of fancy ; 
that I deal in noisy exclamations, and mighty professions of pat- 
riotism. Gentlemen may retain their opinions ; but I look on that 
paper a? the most fatal plan that could possibly be conceived to 
enslave a free people. If such be your rage for novelty, take it 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



85 



and welcome ; but you never shall have my consent. My senti- 
ments may appear extravagant, but I can tell you, that a number 
of my fellow-citizens have kindred sentiments ; and I am anxious, 
if my country should come into the hands of tyranny, to excul- 
pate myself from being in any degree the cause, and to exert my 
faculties to the utmost to extricate her. Whether I am gratified 
or not in my beloved form of government, I consider that the more 
she is plunged into distress, the more it is my duty to relieve her. 
Whatever may be the result, I shall wait with patience till the day 
may come, when an opportunity shall offer to exert myself in her 
cause. 

But I should be led to take that man for a lunatic, who should 
tell me to run into the adoption of a government avowedly defec- 
tive, in hopes of having it amended afterwards. Were I about to 
give away the meanest particle of my own property, I should act 
with more prudence and discretion. My anxiety and fears are 
great, lest America, by the adoption of this system, should be cast 
J nto a fathomless abyss. 

8 



SPEECH OF PATRICK HENRY 

ON THE EXPEDIENCY OF ADOPTING THE 

FEDERAL CONSTITUTION, 

DELIVERED IN THE CONVENTION OF VIRGINIA, JUNE 24, 1788.* 



Mr. Chairman, 
The proposal of ratification is premature. The importance of 
the subject requires the most mature deliberation. The honorable 
member must forgive me for declaring my dissent from it, because, if I 
understand it rightly, it admits that the new system is defective, and 
most capitally ; for, immediately after the proposed ratification, there 
comes a declaration, that the paper before you is not intended to vio- 
late any of these three great rights — the liberty of religion, liberty of 
the press, and the trial by jury. What is the inference, when you 
enumerate the rights which you are to enjoy ? That those not 
enumerated are relinquished. There are only three things to be 
retained — religion, freedom of the press, and jury trial. Will not 
the ratification carry every thing, without excepting these three 
things? Will not all the world pronounce, that we intended to 
give up all the rest ? Every thing it speaks of, by way of rights, 
is comprised in these three things. Your subsequent amendments 
only go to these three amendments. I feel myself distressed, be- 
cause the necessity of securing our personal rights seems not to 
have pervaded the minds of men ; for many other valuable things 
are omitted. For instance : general warrants, by which an officer 
may search suspected places without evidence of the commission of a 
fact, or seize any person without evidence of his crime, ought to be 
prohibited. As these are admitted, any man may be seized ; any pro- 
perty may be taken, in the most arbitrary manner, without any evi- 
dence or reason. Everything, the most sacred, maybe searched and 
ransacked by the strong hand of power. We have infinitely more 
reason to dread general warrants here, than they have in England ; 

* Upon the resolution of Mr. Wythe, which proposed, " That the committee 
should ratify the constitution, and that whatsoever amendments might be 
deemed necessary should be recommended to the consideration of the con- 
gress, which should first assemble under the constitution, to be acted upon ac- 
f ording to the mode prescribed therein." 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH, &c. 



87 



because there, if a person be confined, liberty may be quickly ob- 
tained by the writ of habeas corpus. But here, a man living 
many hundred miles from the judges may rot in prison before he 
can get that writ. 

Another most fatal omission is, with respect to standing armies. 
In your bill of rights of Virginia, they are said to be dangerous 
to liberty ; and it tells you, that the proper defence of a free state 
consists in militia ; and so I might go on to ten or eleven things of 
immense consequence secured in your bill of rights, concerning 
which that proposal is silent. Is that the language of the bill of 
rights in England ? Is it the language of the American bill of 
rights, that these three rights, and these only, are valuable ? Is it 
the language of men going into a new government ? Is it not 
necessary to speak of those things before you go into a compact ? 
How do these three things stand ? As one of the parties, we de- 
clare we do not mean to give them up. This is very dictatorial ; 
much more so than the conduct which proposes alterations as the 
condition of adoption. In a compact, there are two parties — one 
accepting, and another proposing. As a party, we propose that 
we shall secure these three things ; and before we have the assent 
of the other contracting party, we go into the compact, and leave 
these things at their mercy. What will be the consequence? 
Suppose the other states will call this dictatorial : they will say, 
Virginia has gone into the government, and carried with her cer- 
tain propositions, which, she says, ought to be concurred in by the 
other states. They will declare, that she has no right to dictate 
to other states the conditions on which they shall come into the 
union. According to the honorable member's proposal, the ratifi- 
cation will cease to be obligatory unless they accede to these 
amendments. We have ratified it. You have committed a viola- 
tion, they will say. They have not violated it. We say we will 
go out of it. You are then reduced to a sad dilemma — to give up 
these three rights, or leave the government. This is worse than 
our present confederation, to which we have hitherto adhered 
honestly and faithfully. We shall be told we have violated it, be- 
cause we have left it for the infringement and violation of condi- 
tions, which they never agreed to be a part of the ratification. 
The ratification will be complete. The proposal is made by one 
party. We, as the other, accede to it, and propose the security 
of these three great rights ; for it is only a proposal. In order to 
secure them, you are left in that state of fatal hostility, which 1 
shall as much deplore as the honorable gentleman. I exhort gen- 
tlemen to think seriously before they ratify this constitution, and 
persuade themselves that they will succeed in making a feeble ef- 
fort to get amendments after adoption. With respect to that part 
of the proposal which says that every power not granted re- 



83 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



mains with the people, it must be previous to adoption, or it will 
involve this country in inevitable destruction. To talk of it as a 
thing subsequent, not as one of your inalienable rights, is leaving 
it to the casual opinion of the congress who shall take up the con- 
sideration of that matter. They will not reason with you about 
the effect of this constitution. They will not take the opinion of 
this committee concerning its operation. They will construe it as 
they please. If you place it subsequently, let me ask the conse- 
quences. Among ten thousand implied powers which they may 
assume, they may, if we be engaged in war, liberate every one of 
your slaves, if they please. And this must and will be done by 
men, a majority of whom have not a common interest with you. 
They will, therefore, have no feeling for your interests. 

It has been repeatedly said here that the great object of a 
national government is national defence. That power which is 
said to be intended for security and safety, may be rendered de- 
testable and oppressive. If you give power to the general govern- 
ment to provide for the general defence, the means must be com- 
mensurate to the end. All the means in the possession of the 
people must be given to the government which is intrusted with 
the public defence. In this state there are two hundred and thirty- 
six thousand blacks, and there are many in several other states ; but 
there are few or none in the Northern States ; and yet, if the 
Northern States shall be of opinion that our numbers are number- 
less, they may call forth every national resource. May congress 
not say, that every black man must fight? Did we not see a little 
of this in the last war ? We were not so hard pushed as to make 
emancipation general : but acts of assembly passed, that every slave 
who would go to the army should be free. Another thing will con- 
tribute to bring this event about : slavery is detested ; we feel its 
fatal effects ; we deplore it with all the pity of humanity. Let all 
these considerations, at some future period, press with full force on 
the minds of congress. Let that urbanity, which I trust will dis- 
tinguish America, and the necessity of national defence — let all 
these things operate on their minds, and they will search that pa- 
per, and see if they have power of manumission. And have they 
not, sir ? Have they not power to provide for the general defence 
and welfare ? May they not think that these call for the abolition 
of slavery ? May they not pronounce all slaves free, and will 
they not be warranted by that power ? There is no ambiguous 
implication, or logical deduction. The paper speaks to the point. 
They have the power in clear, unequivocal terms, and will clearly 
and certainly exercise it. As much as I deplore slavery, I see 
that prudence forbids its abolition. I deny that the general gov- 
ernment ought to set them free, because a decided majority of the 
states have not the ties of sympathy and fellow-feeling for those 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



89 



whose interest would be affected by their emancipation. The 
majority of congress is to the north, and the slaves are to the 
south. In this situation, I see a great deal of the property of the 
people of Virginia in jeopardy, and their peace and tranquillity 
gone away. I repeat it again, that it would rejoice my very soul 
that every one of my fellow-beings was emancipated. As we 
ought with gratitude to admire that decree of Heaven which has 
numbered us among the free, we ought to lament and deplore the 
necessity of holding our fellow-men in bondage. Bat is it practi- 
cable, by any human means, to liberate them, without, producing 
the most dreadful and ruinous consequences ? We ought to pos- 
sess them in the manner we have inherited them from our ances- 
tors, as their manumission is incompatible with the felicity of the 
country. But we ought to soften, as much as possible, the rigor 
of their unhappy fate. I know that in a variety of particular in- 
stances, the legislature, listening to complaints, have admitted their 
emancipation. Let me not dwell on this subject. I will only 
add, that this, as well as every other property of the people of 
Virginia, is in jeopardy, and put in the hands of those who have 
no similarity of situation with us. This is a local matter, and I 
can see no propriety in subjecting it to congress. 

With respect to subsequent amendments, proposed by the wor- 
thy member, I am distressed when I hear the expression. It is a 
new one altogether, and such a one as stands against every idea 
of fortitude and manliness, in the states, or any one else. Evils 
admitted, in order to be removed subsequently, and tyranny sub- 
mitted to, in order to be excluded by a subsequent alteration, are 
things totally new to me. But I am sure he meant nothing but to 
amuse the committee. I know his candor. His proposal is an 
idea dreadful to me. I ask — Does experience warrant such a thing 
from the beginning of the world to this day ? Do you enter into 
a compact of government first, and afterwards settle the terms of 
the government ? It is admitted by every one, that this is a com- 
pact. Although the confederation be lost, it is a compact consti- 
tution, or something of that nature. I confess I never heard of 
such an idea before. It is most abhorrent to my mind. You en- 
danger the tranquillity of your country, you stab its repose, if you 
accept this government unaltered. How are you to allay animos- 
ities ? For such there are, great and fatal. He flatters me, and 
tells me, that I could influence the people, and reconcile them to 
it. Sir, their sentiments are as firm and steady as they are patri- 
otic. Were I to ask them to apostatize from their native religion, 
they would despise me. They are not to be shaken in their 
opinions with respect to the propriety of preserving their rights. 
You never can persuade them, that it is necessary to relinquish 
them. Were I to attempt to persuade them to abandon their pat- 
8* M 



90 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



riotic sentiments, I should look on myself as the most infamous of 
men. I believe it to be a fact, that the great body of yeomanry 
are in decided opposition to it. I may say with confidence, that, for 
nineteen counties adjacent to each other, nine tenths of the people 
are conscientiously opposed to it. I may be mistaken, but I give you 
it as my opinion ; and my opinion is founded on personal knowledge 
in some measure, and other good authority. I have not hunted 
popularity by declaiming to injure this government. Though 
public fame might say so, it was not owing to me that this flame 
of opposition has been kindled and spread. These men never 
will part with their political opinions. If they should see their 
political happiness secured to the latest posterity, then indeed they 
might agree to it. Subsequent amendments will not do for men 
of this cast. Do you consult the union in proposing them ? You 
may amuse them as long as you please ; but they will never like it. 
You have not solid reality — the hearts and hands of the men who 
are to be governed. 

Have gentlemen no respect to the actual dispositions of the 
people in the adopting states ? Look at Pennsylvania and Massa- 
chusetts. These two great states have raised as great objections 
to that government as we do. There was a majority of only 
nineteen in Massachusetts. We are told that only ten thousand 
were represented in Pennsylvania, although seventy thousand had 
a right to be represented. Is not this a serious thing ? Is it not 
worth while to turn your eyes for a moment, from subsequent 
amendments, to the situation of your country ? Can you have a 
lasting union in these circumstances ? It will be in vain to expect 
it. But if you agree to previous amendments, you shall have 
union, firm and solid. I cannot conclude without saying, that 1 
shall have nothing to do with it, if subsequent amendments be de- 
termined upon. Oppressions will be carried on as radically by the 
majority, when adjustments and accommodations will be held up. 
I say, I conceive it my duty, if this government is adopted before 
it is amended, to go home. I shall act as I think my duty re- 
quires. Every other gentleman will do the same. Previous 
amendments, in my opinion, are necessary to procure peace and 
tranquillity. 1 fear if they be not agreed to, every movement and 
operation of government will cease ; and how long that baneful 
thing, civil discord, will stay from this country, God only knows. 
When men are free from restraint, how long will you suspend 
their fury ? The interval between this and bloodshed is but a 
moment. The licentious and wicked of the community will seize 
with avidity every thing you hold. In this unhappy situation, 
what is to be done ? It surpasses my stock of wisdom. If you 
will, in the language of freemen, stipulate that there are rights which 
no man under heaven can take from you, you shall have me going 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



along with you, and not otherwise. — [Here Mr. Henry informed 
the committee, that he had a resolution prepared, to refer a decla- 
ration of rights, with certain amendments to the most exceptionable 
parts of the constitution, to the other states in the confederacy, for 
their consideration, previous to its ratification. The clerk then 
read the resolution, the declaration of rights, and amendments, 
which were nearly the same as those ultimately proposed by the 
convention, for the consideration of congress. He then resumed 
the subject.] I have thus candidly submitted to you, Mr. Chair- 
man, and this committee, what occurred to me as proper amend- 
ments to the constitution, and a declaration of rights containing 
those fundamental, inalienable privileges, which I conceive to be 
essential to liberty and happiness. I believe, that, on a review of 
these amendments, it will still be found, that the arm of power will 
be sufficiently strong for national purposes, when these restrictions 
shall be a part of the government. I believe no gentleman, who 
opposes me in sentiments, will be able to discover that any one 
feature of a strong government is altered ; and at the same time 
your inalienable rights are secured by them. The government 
unaltered may be terrible to America, but can never be loved, till 
it be amended. You find all the resources of the continent may 
be drawn to a point. In danger, the president may concentre to a 
point every effort of the continent. If the government be con- 
structed to satisfy the people and remove their apprehensions, the 
wealth and strength of the continent will go where public utility 
shall direct. This government, with these restrictions, will be a 
strong government, united with the privileges of the people. In 
my weak judgment, a government is strong, when it applies to the 
most important end of all governments — the rights and privileges 
of the people. In the honorable member's proposal, jury trial, the 
press, and religion, and other essential rights, are not to be given 
up. Other essential rights — what are they ? The world will say, 
that you intended to give them up. When you go into an enu- 
meration of your rights, and stop that enumeration, the inevitable 
conclusion is, that what is omitted is intended to be surrendered. 

Anxious as I am to be as little troublesome as possible, I can- 
not leave this part of the subject without adverting to one remark 
of the honorable gentleman. He says, that, rather than bring the 
union into danger, he will adopt it with its imperfections. A great 
deal is said about disunion, and consequent dangers. I have no 
claim to a greater share of fortitude than others ; but I can see 
no kind of danger. I form my judgment on a single fact alone, 
that we are at peace with all the world ; nor is there any apparent 
cause of a rupture with any nation in the world. Is it among the 
American states that the cause of disunion is to be feared ? Are 
not the states using all their efforts for the promotion of uniop ? 



92 



MR. HENRY'S SPEECH ON 



New England sacrifices local prejudices for the purposes of union. 
We hear the necessity of the union, and predilection for the union, 
reechoed from all parts of the continent ; and all at once disunion 
is to follow ! If gentlemen dread disunion, the very thing they 
advocate will inevitably produce it. A previous ratification will 
raise insurmountable obstacles to union. New York is an in- 
surmountable obstacle to it, and North Carolina also. They will 
never accede to it till it be amended. A great part of Virginia 
is opposed, most decidedly, to it, as it stands. This very spirit 
which will govern us in these three states, will find a kindred spirit 
in the adopting states. Give me leave to say, that it is very prob- 
lematical whether the adopting states can stand on their own legs. 
I hear only on one side, but as far as my information goes, there are 
heart-burnings and animosities among them. Will these animosi- 
ties be cured by subsequent amendments ? 

Turn away from America, and consider European politics. The 
nations there, which can trouble us, are France, England, and Spain. 
But at present we know for a certainty, that those nations are en- 
gaged in very different pursuits from American conquests. We 
are told by our intelligent ambassador, that there is no such danger 
as has been apprehended. Give me leave then to say, that dan- 
gers from beyond the Atlantic are imaginary. From these prem- 
ises, then, it may be concluded, that, from the creation of the world 
to this time, there never was a more fair and proper opportunity 
than we have at this day to establish such a government as will 
permanently establish the most transcendent political felicity. 
Since the revolution there has not been so much experience. 
Since then, the general interests of America have not been better 
understood, nor the union more ardently loved, than at this pres- 
ent moment. I acknowledge the weakness of the old confedera- 
tion. Every man says, that something must be done. Where is 
the moment more favorable than this? During the war, when 
ten thousand dangers surrounded us, America was magnanimous. 
What was the language of the little state of Maryland ? "I will 
have time to consider. I will hold out three years. Let what 
may come, I will have time to reflect." Magnanimity appeared 
everywhere. What was the upshot? — America triumphed. Is 
there any thing to forbid us to offer these amendments to the other 
states ? If this moment goes away unimproved, we shall never 
see its return. We now act under a happy system, which says, 
that a majority may alter the government when necessary. But 
by the paper proposed, a majority will forever endeavor in vain to 
alter it. Three fourths may. Is not this the most promising time 
for securing the necessary alterations ? Will you go into that gov- 
ernment, where it is a principle, that a contemptible minority may 
prevent an alteration ? What will be the language of the majori- 



THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. 



93 



ty ? — Change the government. — Nay, seven eighths of the people 
of America may wish the change ; but the minority may come 
with a Roman Veto, and object to the alteration. The language 
of a magnanimous country and of freemen is, Till you remove the 
defects, we will not accede. It would be in vain for me to show, 
that there is no danger to prevent our obtaining those amendments, 
if you are not convinced already. If the other states will not 
agree to them, it is not an inducement to union. The language of 
this paper is not dictatorial, but merely a proposition for amend- 
ments. The proposition of Virginia met with a favorable recep- 
tion before. We proposed that convention which met at Annapo- 
lis. It was not called dictatorial. We proposed that at Philadel- 
phia. W as Virginia thought dictatorial ? But Virginia is now to 
lose her preeminence. Those rights of equality, to which the 
meanest individual in the community is entitled, are to bring us 
down infinitely below the Delaware people. Have we not a right 
to say, Hear our propositions ? Why, sir, your slaves have a right 
to make their humble requests. Those, who are in the meanest 
occupations of human life, have a right to complain. What do 
we require ? Not preeminence, but safety ; that our citizens may 
be able to sit down in peace and security under their own fig-trees. 
I am confident that sentiments like these will meet with unison in 
every state ; for they will wish to banish discord from the American 
soil. I am certain that the warmest friend of the constitution wish- 
es to have fewer enemies — fewer of those who pester and plague 
him with opposition. I could not withhold from my fellow-citizens 
any thing so reasonable. I fear you will have no union, unless 
you remove the cause of opposition. Will you sit down content- 
ed with the name of union without any solid foundation ? 



SPEECH OF FISHER AMES, 



ON 

THE BRITISH TREATY, 

DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED 
STATES, APRIL 28, 1796. 



On the 28th October, 1794, a treaty between Great. Britain and the United 
States (known as "Jay's Treaty") was concluded and subsequently rat- 
ified by the president of the United States. On the 1st March, 1796, it 
was communicated to the house of representatives, in order that the 
necessary appropriations might be made to carry it into effect, in com- 
mittee of the whole on the following resolution : — Resolved, as the opin- 
ion of this committee, that it is expedient to pass the laws necessary for 
carrying into effect the treaty with Great Britain. Mr. Ames spoke as 
follows : — 

Mr. Chairman, 

T entertain the hope, perhaps a rash one, that my strength will 
hold me out to speak a few minutes. 

In my judgment, a right decision will depend more on the tem- 
per and manner, with which we may prevail upon ourselves to 
contemplate the subject, than upon the development of any pro- 
found political principles, or any remarkable skill in the applica- 
tion of them. If we could succeed to neutralize our inclinations, 
we should find less difficulty than we have to apprehend in sur- 
mounting all our objections. 

The suggestion, a few davs ago, that the house manifested 

DO » 

symptoms of heat and irritation, was made and retorted as if the 
charge ought to create surprise, and would convey reproach. Let 
us be more just to ourselves, and to the occasion. Let us not af- 
fect to deny the existence and the intrusion of some portion of 
prejudice and feeling into the debate, when, from the very struc- 
ture of our nature, we ought to anticipate the circumstance as a 
probability, and when we are admonished by the evidence of our 
senses that it is the fact. 

How can we make professions for ourselves, and offer exhorta- 
tions to the house, that no influence should be felt but that of 
duty, and no guide respected but that of the understanding, while 
the peal to rally every passion of man is continually ringing in 
our ears ? 



MR. AMES'S SPEECH, &c. 



95 



Our understandings have been addressed, it is true, and with 
ability and effect ; but, I demand, has any corner of the heart 
been left unexplored ? It has been ransacked to find auxiliary ar- 
guments, and, when that attempt failed, to awaken the sensibilities 
that would require non~. Every prejudice and feeling lias been 
summoned to listen to some peculiar style of address ; and yet we 
seem to believe, and to consider a doubt as an affront, that we are 
strangers to any influence but that of unbiased reason. 

It would be strange, that a subject, which has roused in turn all 
the passions of the country, should be discussed without the inter- 
ference of any of our own. We are men, and, therefore, not ex- 
empt from those passions : as citizens and representatives, we feel 
the interests that must excite them. The hazard of great inter- 
ests cannot fail to agitate strong passions. We are not disinter- 
ested ; it is impossible we should be dispassionate. The warmth 
of such feelings may becloud the judgment, and, for a time, per- 
vert the understanding. But the public sensibility, and our own, 
has sharpened the spirit of inquiry, and given an animation to the 
debate. The public attention has been quickened to mark the 
progress of the discussion, and its judgment, often hasty and er- 
roneous on first impressions, has become solid and enlightened at 
last. Our result will, I hope, on that account, be the safer and 
more mature, as well as more accordant with that of the nation. 
The only constant agents in political affairs are the passions of 
men. Shall we complain of our nature — shall we say that man 
ought to have been made otherwise ? It is right already, because 
he, from whom we derive our nature, ordained it so; and because 
thus made and thus acting, the cause of truth and the public good 
is the more surely promoted. 

But an attempt has been made to produce an influence of a na- 
ture more stubborn, and more unfriendly to truth. It is very un- 
fairly pretended, that the constitutional right of this house is at 
stake, and to be asserted and preserved only by a vote in the neg- 
ative. We hear it said, that this is a struggle for liberty, a manly 
resistance against the design to nullify this assembly, and to make 
it a cipher in the government: that the president and senate, the 
numerous meetings in the cities, and the influence of the general 
alarm of the country, are the agents and instruments of a scheme 
of coercion and terror, to force the treaty down our throats, though 
we loathe it, and in spite of the clearest convictions of duty and 
conscience. 

It is necessary to pause here and inquire, whether suggestions of 
this kind be not unfair in their very texture and fabric, and per- 
nicious in all their influences. They oppose an obstacle in the 
path of inquiry, not simply discouraging, but absolutely insurmount 
able. They will not yield to argument ; for as they were not 



98 



Mil. AMES'S SPEECH ON 



reasoned up, they cannot be reasoned down. They are higher 
than a Chinese wall in truth's way, and built of materials that are 
indestructible. While this remains, it is vain to argue ; it is vain 
to say to this mountain, Be thou cast into the sea. For, I ask of 
the men of knowledge of the world, whether they would not hold 
him for a blockhead, that should hope to prevail in an argument 
whose scope and object is to mortify the self-love of the expected 
proselyte ? \ ask, further, when such attempts have been made, 
have they not failed of success ? The indignant heart repels a 
conviction that is believed to debase it. 

The self-love of an individual is not warmer in its sense, nor 
more constant in its action, than what is called, in French, V esprit 
da corps, or the self-love of an assembly ; that jealous affection 
which a body of men is always found to bear towards its own pre- 
rogatives and power. I will not condemn this passion. Why 
should we urge an unmeaning censure, or yield to groundless fears 
that truth and duty will be abandoned, because men in a public 
assembly are still men, and feel that esprit du corps which is one 
of the laws of their nature ? Still less should we despond or com- 
plain, if we reflect, that this very spirit is a guardian instinct, that 
watches over the life of this assembly. It cherishes the principle 
of self-preservation, and without its existence, and its existence 
with all the strength we see it possess, the privileges of the repre- 
sentatives of the people, and mediately the liberties of the people, 
would not be guarded, as they are, with a vigilance that never 
sleeps, and an unrelaxing constancy and courage. 

If the consequences, most unfairly attributed to the vote in the 
affirmative, were not chimerical, and worse, for they are deceptive, 
I should think it a reproach to be found even moderate in my 
zeal to assert the constitutional powers of this assembly : and 
whenever they shall be in real danger, Xhe present occasion 
affords proof, that there will be no want of advocates and 
champions. 

Indeed, so prompt are these feelings, and, when once roused, so 
difficult to pacify, that if we could prove the alarm was groundless, 
the prejudice against the appropriations may remain on the mind, 
and it may even pass for an act of prudence and duty to negative 
a measure which was lately believed by ourselves, and may here- 
after be misconceived by others, to encroach upon the powers of 
the house. Principles that bear a remote affinity with usurpation 
on those powers will be rejected, not merely as errors, but as 
wrongs. Our sensibilities will shrink from a post where it is pos- 
sible they may be wounded, and be inflamed by the slightest sus- 
picion of an assault. 

While these, prepossessions remain, all argument is useless. It 
may be heard with the ceremony of attention, and lavish its owr 



THE BRITISH TREATY. 



97 



resources, and the patience it wearies, to no manner of purpose. 
The ears may be open ; but the mind will remain locked up, and 
every pass to the understanding guarded. 

Unless, therefore, this jealous and repulsive fear for the rights of 
the house can be allayed, I will not ask a hearing. 

1 cannot press this topic too far ; I cannot address myself with 
too much emphasis to the magnanimity and candor of those who 
sit here, to suspect their own feelings, and, while they do, to ex- 
amine the grounds of their alarm. I repeat it, we must conquer 
our persuasion, that this body has an interest in one side of the 
question more than the other, before we attempt to surmount our 
objections. On most subjects, and solemn ones too, perhaps in the 
most solemn of all, we form our creed more from inclination than 
evidence. 

Let me expostulate with gentlemen to admit, if it be only by 
way of supposition, and for a moment, that it is barely possible 
they have yielded too suddenly to their alarms for the powers of 
this house ; that the addresses which have been made with such 
variety of forms, and with so great dexterity in some of them, to all 
that is prejudice and passion in the heart, are either the effects or 
the instruments of artifice and deception, and then let them see the 
subject once more in its singleness and simplicity. 

It will be impossible, on taking a fair review of the subject, to 
justify the passionate appeals that have been made to us to strug- 
gle for our liberties and rights, and the solemn exhortations to re- 
ject the proposition, said to be concealed in that on your table, to 
surrender them forever. In spite of this mock solemnity, I de- 
mand, if the house will not concur in the measure to execute the 
treaty, what other course shall we take ? How many ways of pro- 
ceeding lie open before us ? 

In the nature of things there are but three ; we are either to 
make the treaty, to observe it, or break it. It would be absurd to 
say we will do neither. If I may repeat a phrase already so much 
abused, we are under coercion to do one of them, and we have no 
power, by the exercise of our discretion, to prevent the conse- 
quences of a choice. 

By refusing to act, we choose. The treaty will be broken and 
fall to the ground. Where is the fitness, then, of replying to those 
who urge upon the house the topics of duty and policy, that they 
attempt to force the treaty down, and to compel this assembly to 
renounce its discretion, and to degrade itself to the rank of a blind 
and passive instrument in the hands of the treaty-making power? 
Tn case we reject the appropriation, we do not secure any greater 
liberty of action, we gain no safer shelter than before from the 
consequences of the decision. Indeed, they are not to be evaded. 
It is neither just nor manly to complain that the treaty-making 
9 N 



93 



MR. AMES'S SPEECH ON 



power has produced this coercion to act. It is not the art or the 
despotism of that power — it is the nature of things that compels. 
Shall we. dreading to become the blind instruments of power, yield 
ourselves the blinder dupes of mere sounds of imposture ? Yet 
that word, that empty word, coercion, has given scope to an elo- 
quence, that, one would imagine, could not be tired, and did not 
choose to be quieted. 

Let us examine still more in detail the alternatives that are be- 
fore us, and we shall scarcely fail to see, in still stronger lights, 
the futility of our apprehensions for the power and liberty of the 
house. 

If, as some have suggested, the thing called a treaty is incom- 
plete — if it has no binding force or obligation — the first question is, 
Will this House complete the instrument, and, by concurring, im- 
part to it that force which it wants ? 

The doctrine has been avowed, that the treaty, though formally 
ratified by the executive power of both nations, though published 
as a law for our own by the president's proclamation, is still a 
mere proposition submitted to this assembly, no way distinguish- 
able, in point of authority or obligation, from a motion for leave to 
bring in a bill, or any other original act of ordinary legislation. 
This doctrine, so novel in our country, yet so dear to many, pre- 
cisely for the reason, that, in the contention for power, victory is 
always dear, is obviously repugnant to the very terms as well as 
the fair interpretation of our own resolutions (Mr. Blount's). We 
declare, that the treaty-making power is exclusively vested in the 
president and senate, and not in this house. Need I say, that 
we fly in the face of that resolution, when we pretend, that the 
acts of that power are not valid until w r e have concurred in them ? 
It would be nonsense, or worse, to use the language of the most 
glaring contradiction, and to claim a share in a power which we 
at the same time disclaim as exclusively vested in other depart- 
ments. 

What can be more strange than to say, that the compacts of the 
president and senate with foreign nations are treaties, without our 
agency, and yet those compacts want all power and obligation, 
until they are sanctioned by our concurrence ? It is not my de- 
sign, in this place,, if at all, to go into the discussion of this part of 
the subject. I will, at least for the present, take it for granted, 
that this monstrous opinion stands in little need of remark, and if it 
does, lies almost out of the reach of refutation. 

But, say those who hide the absurdity under the cover of am- 
biguous phrases, have we no discretion ? and if we have, are we 
not to make use of it in judging of the expediency or inexpediency 
of the treaty ? Our resolution claims that privilege, and we can- 
not surrender it without equal inconsistency and breach of duty. 



THE BRITISH TREATY. 



99 



If there be any inconsistency in the case, it lies, not in making 
the appropriations for the treaty, but in the resolution itself (Mr. 
Blount's). Let us examine it more nearly. A treaty is a bar- 
gain between nations, binding in good faith ; and what makes a 
bargain ? The assent of the contracting parties. We allow that 
the treaty power is not in this house ; this house has no share in 
contracting, and is not a party : of consequence, the president and 
senate alone may make a treaty that is binding in good faith. 
We claim, however, say the gentlemen, a right to judge of the ex- 
pediency of treaties ; that is the constitutional province of our dis- 
cretion. Be it so. What follows ? Treaties, when adjudged by 
us to be inexpedient, fall to the ground, and the public faith is not 
hurt. This, incredible and extravagant as it may seem, is assert- 
ed. The amount of it, in plainer language, is this — the president 
and senate are to make national bargains, and this house has noth- 
ing to do in making them. But bad bargains do not bind this 
house, and, of inevitable consequence, do not bind the nation. 
When a national bargain, called a treaty, is made, its binding force 
does not depend upon the making, but upon our opinion that it is 
good. As our opinion on the matter can be known and declared 
only by ourselves, when sitting in our legislative capacity, the 
treaty, though ratified, and, as we choose to term it, made, is 
hung up in suspense, till our sense is ascertained. We condemn 
the bargain, and it falls, though, as we say, our faith does not. 
We approve a bargain as expedient, and it stands firm, and binds 
the nation. Yet, even in this latter case, its force is plainly not 
derived from the ratification by the treaty-making power, but from 
our approbation. Who will trace these inferences, and pretend 
that we have no share, according to the argument, in the treaty- 
making power? These opinions, nevertheless, have been advo- 
cated with infinite zeal and perseverance. Is it possible that any 
man can be hardy enough to avow them, and their ridiculous con- 
sequences ? 

Let me hasten to suppose the treaty is considered as already 
mide, and then the alternative is fairly presented to the mind, 
whether we will observe the treaty or break it. This, in fact, is 
the naked question. 

If we choose to observe it w r ith good faith, our course is obvi- 
ous. Whatever is stipulated to be done by the nation, must be 
complied with. Our agency, if it should be requisite, cannot be 
properly refused. And I do not see why it is not as obligatory a 
rule of conduct for the legislative as for the courts of law. 

I cannot lose this opportunity to remark, that the coercion, so 
much dreaded and declaimed against, appears at length to be no 
more than the authority of principles, the despotism of duty. Gen- 
tle men complain we are forced to act in this way ; we are forced 



100 



MR. AMES'S SPEECH ON 



to swallow the treaty. It is very true, unless we claim the liberty 
of abuse, the right to act as we ought not. There is but one right 
way open for us ; the laws of morality and good faith have fenced 
up every other. What sort of liberty is that which we presume 
to exercise against the authority of those laws ? It is for tyrants 
to complain, that principles are restraints, and that they have no 
liberty, so long as their despotism has limits. These principles 
will be unfolded by examining the remaining question : — 

Shall we break the treaty? 

The treaty is bad, fatally bad, is the cry. It sacrifices the in- 
terest, the honor, the independence of the United States, and the 
faith of our engagements to France. If we listen to the clamor of 
party intemperance, the evils are of a number not to be counted, 
and of a nature not to be borne, even in idea. The language of 
passion and exaggeration may silence that of sober reason in other 
places ; it has not done it here. The question here is, whether the 
treaty be really so very fatal as to oblige the nation to break its 
faith. I admit that such a treaty ought not to be executed. I 
admit that self-preservation is the first law of society, as well as of 
individuals. It would, perhaps, be deemed an abuse of terms to 
call that a treaty, which violates such a principle. I waive also, 
for the present, any inquiry, what departments shall represent the 
nation, and annul the stipulations of a treaty. I content myself 
with pursuing the inquiry, whether the nature of this compact be 
such as to justify our refusal to carry it into effect. A treaty is the 
promise of a nation. Now, promises do not always bind him that 
makes them. 

But I lay down two rules, which ought to guide us in this case. 
The treaty must appear to be bad, not merely in the petty details, 
but in its character, principle, and mass. And, in the next place, 
this ought to be ascertained by the decided and general concur- 
rence of the enlightened public. I confess there seems to be 
something very like ridicule thrown over the debate by the discus- 
sion of the articles in detail. 

The undecided point is, shall we break our faith ? And while 
our country and enlightened Europe await the issue with more 
than curiosity, we are employed to gather piecemeal, and article 
by article, from the instrument, a justification for the deed by trivial 
calculations of commercial profit and loss. This is little worthy of 
the subject, of this body, or of the nation. If the treaty is bad, it 
will appear to be so in its mass. Evil to a fatal extreme, if that 
be its tendency, requires no proof; it brings it. Extremes speak 
for themselves, and make their own law. What if the direct 
voyage of American ships to Jamaica, with horses or lumber, might 
pet one or two per centum more than the present trade to Suri- 



THE BRITISH TREATY. 



101 



nam ; would the proof of the fact avail any thing in so grave a 
question as the violation of the public engagements ? 

It is in vain to allege, that our faith, plighted to France, is vio- 
lated by this new treaty. Our prior treaties are expressly saved 
from the operation of the British treaty. And what do those mean 
who say, tlfat our honor was forfeited by treating at all, and es- 
pecially by such a treaty ? Justice, the laws and practice of na- 
tions, a just regard for peace as a duty to mankind, and the known 
wish of our citizens, as well as that self-respect which required it 
of the nation to act with dignity and moderation, all these forbade 
an appeal to arms, before we had tried the effect of negotiation. 
The honor of the United States was saved, not forfeited, by treat- 
ing. The treaty itself, by its stipulations for the posts, for indem- 
nity, and for a due observation of our neutral rights, has justly 
raised the character of the nation. Never did the name of Amer- 
ica appear in Europe with more lustre than upon the event of rati- 
fying this instrument. The fact is of a nature to overcome all 
contradiction. 

But the independence of the country — we are colonists again. 
This is the cry of the very men who tell us, that France will re- 
sent our exercise of the rights of an independent nation to adjust 
our wrongs with an aggressor, without giving her the opportunity 
to say those wrongs shall subsist and shall not be adjusted. This 
is an admirable specimen of the spirit of independence. The treaty 
with Great Britain, it cannot be denied, is unfavorable to this 
strange sort of independence. 

Few men of any reputation for sense, among those who say the 
treaty is bad, will put that reputation so much at hazard as to pre- 
tend that it is so extremely bad as to warrant and require a viola- 
tion of the public faith. The proper ground of the controversy, 
therefore, is really unoccupied by the opposers of the treaty; a r > 
the very hinge of the debate is on the point, not of its being goou 
or otherwise, but whether it is intolerably and fatally pernicious. 
If loose and ignorant declaimers have any where asserted the latter 
idea, it is too extravagant, and too solidly refuted, to be repeated 
here. Instead of any attempt to expose it still further, I will say, 
and I appeal with confidence to the candor of many opposers of 
the treaty to acknowledge, that if it had been permitted to go into 
operation silently, like our other treaties, so little alteration of any 
sort would be made by it in the great mass of our commercial and 
agricultural concerns, that it would not be generally discovered by 
its effects to be in force, during the term for which it was contract- 
ed. I place considerable reliance on the weight men of candor 
will give to this remark, because I believe it to be true, and little 
short of undeniable. When the panic dread of the treaty shall 

cease, as it certainly must, it will be seen through another medium. 
9 # 



102 



MR. AMES'S SPEECH ON 



Those who shall make search into the articles for tne cause of 
their alarms, will be so far from finding stipulations that will ope- 
rate fatally, they will discover few of them that will have any last- 
ing operation at all. Those which relate to the disputes between 
the two countries, will spend their force upon the subjects in dis- 
pute, and extinguish them. The commercial articles are more of 
a nature to confirm the existing state of things than to change 
it. The treaty alarm was purely an address to the imagination 
and prejudices of the citizens, and not on that account the less 
formidable. Objections that proceed upon error, in fact or cal- 
culation, may be traced and exposed ; but such as are drawn 
from the imagination or addressed to it, elude definition, and re- 
turn to domineer over the mind, after having been banished from 
it by truth. 

I will not so far abuse the momentary strength that is lent to me 
by the zeal of the occasion, as to enlarge upon f the commercial 
operation of the treaty. I proceed to the second proposition, 
which I have stated as indispensably requisite to a refusal of the 
performance of a treaty — will the state of public opinion justify 
the deed ? 

No government, not even a despotism, will break its faith with- 
out some pretext ; and it must be plausible, it must be such as will 
carry the public opinion along with it. Reasons of policy, if not 
of morality, dissuade even Turkey and Algiers from breaches of 
treaty in mere wantonness of perfidy, in open contempt of the re- 
proaches of their subjects. Surely, a popular government will not 
proceed more arbitrarily as it is more free ; nor with less shame 
or scruple in proportion as it has better morals. It will not pro- 
ceed against the faith of treaties at all, unless the strong and de- 
cided sense of the nation shall pronounce, not simply that the 
treaty is not advantageous, but that it ought to be broken and an- 
nulled. Such a plain manifestation of the sense of the citizens is 
indispensably requisite ; first, because, if the popular apprehen- 
sions be not an infallible criterion of the disadvantages of the in- 
strument, their acquiescence in the operation of it is an irrefragable 
proof, that the extreme case does not exist, which alone could jus- 
tify our setting it aside. 

In the next place, this approving opinion of the citizens is re- 
quisite, as the best preventive of the ill consequences of a measure 
always so delicate, and often so hazardous. Individuals would, in 
that case at least, attempt to repel the opprobrium that would be 
thrown upon congress by those who will charge it with perfidy. 
They would give weight to the testimony of facts, and the author- 
ity of principles, on which the government would rest its vindica- 
tion. And if war should ensue upon the violation, our citizens 
would not be divided from their government, nor the ardor of then- 



THE BRITISH TREATY. 



103 



courage be chilled by the consciousness of injustice, and the sense 
of humiliation — that sense which makes those despicable who know 
they are despised. 

1 add a third reason, and with me it has a force that no words 
of mine can augment, that a government, wantonly refusing to ful- 
fil its engagements, is the corrupter of its citizens. Will the laws 
continue to prevail in the hearts of the people, when the respect 
that gives them efficacy is withdrawn from the legislators ? How 
shall we punish vice while we practise it ? We have not force, 
and vain will be our reliance, when we have forfeited the resources 
of opinion. To weaken government and to corrupt morals are 
effects of a breach of faith not to be prevented ; and from effects 
they become causes, producing, with augmented activity, more 
disorder and more corruption ; order will be disturbed and the life 
of the public liberty shortened. 

And who, I would inquire, is hardy enough to pretend, that the 
public voice demands the violation of the treaty ? The evidence 
of the sense of the great mass of the nation is often equivocal; but 
when was it ever manifested with more energy and precision than 
at the present moment ? The voice of the people is raised against 
the measure of refusing the appropriations. If gentlemen should 
urge, nevertheless, that all this sound of alarm is a counterfeit ex- 
pression of the sense of the public, I will proceed to other proofs. 
If the treaty is ruinous to our commerce, what has blinded the 
eyes of the merchants and traders ? Surely they are not enemies 
to trade, or ignorant of their own interests. Their sense is not so 
liable to be mistaken as that of a nation, and they are almost 
unanimous. The articles, stipulating the redress of our injuries by 
captures on the sea, are said to be delusive. By whom is this 
said ? The very men, whose fortunes are staked upon the com- 
petency of that redress, say no such thing. They wait with anx- 
ious fear lest you should annul that compact on which all their 
hopes are rested. 

Thus we offer proof, little short of absolute demonstration, that 
the voice of our country is raised not to sanction, but to deprecate 
the non-performance of our engagements. It is not the nation, it 
is one, and but one branch of the government that proposes to 
reject them. With this aspect of things, to reject is an act of des- 
peration. 

I shall be asked why a treaty so good in some articles, and so 
harmless in others, has met with such unrelenting opposition, 
and how the clamors against it from New Hampshire to Georgia 
can be accounted for. The apprehensions so extensively dif- 
fused, on its first publication, will be vouched as proof, that the 
treaty is bad, and that the people hold it in abhorrence. 

I am not embarrassed to find the answer to this insinuation. 



104 



MR. AMES'S SPEECH ON 



Certainly a foresight of its pernicious operation could not have 
created all the fears that were felt or affected. The alarm spread 
faster than the publication of the treaty. There were more critics 
than readers. Besides, as the subject was examined, those fears 
have subsided. 

The movements of passion are quicker than those of the under- 
standing. We are to search for the causes of first impressions, not 
in the articles of this obnoxious and misrepresented instrument, 
but in the state of the public feeling. 

The fervor of the revolutionary war had not entirely cooled, nor 
its controversies ceased, before the sensibilities of our citizens were 
quickened with a tenfold vivacity, by a new and extraordinary 
subject of irritation. One of the two great nations of Europe un- 
derwent a change which has attracted all our wonder, and inter- 
ested all our sympathies. Whatever they did, the zeal of many 
went with them, and often went to excess. These impressions 
met with much to inflame, and nothing to restrain them. In our 
newspapers, in our feasts, and some of our elections, enthusiasm 
was admitted a merit, a test of patriotism, and that made it conta- 
gious. In the opinion of party, we could not love or hate enough. 
I dare say, in spite of all the obloquy it may provoke, we were 
extravagant in both. It is my right to avow that passions so im- 
petuous, enthusiasm so wild, could not subsist without disturbing 
the sober exercise of reason, without putting at risk the peace and 
precious interests of our country. They were hazarded. I will not 
exhaust the little breath I have left, to say how much, nor by 
whom, or by what means they were rescued from the sacrifice. 
Shall I be called upon to offer my proofs ? They are here. 
They are every where. No one has forgotten the proceedings of 
1794. No one has forgotten the captures of our vessels, and the 
imminent danger of war. The nation thirsted not merely for rep- 
aration, but vengeance. Suffering such wrongs, and agitated by 
such resentments, was it in the power of any words of compact, or 
could any parchment with its seals prevail at once to tranquillize 
the people ? It was impossible. Treaties in England are seldom 
popular, and least of all when the stipulations of amity succeed to 
the bitterness of hatred. Even the best treaty, though nothing be 
refused, will choke resentment, but not satisfy it. Every treaty is 
as sure to disappoint extravagant expectations as to disarm extrav- 
agant passions. Of the latter, hatred is one that takes no bribes. 
They who are animated by the spirit of revenge will not be qui- 
eted by the possibility of profit. 

Why do they complain, that the West Indies are not laid open ? 
Why do they lament, that any restriction is stipulated on the com- 
merce of the East Indies? Why do they pretend, that if they 
reject this, and insist upon more, more will be accomplished ? 



THE BRITISH TREATY. 



105 



Let us be explicit — more would not satisfy. If all was granted, 
would not a treaty of amity with Great Britain still be obnoxious? 
Have we not this instant heard it urged against our envoy, that he 
was not ardent enough in his hatred of Great Britain ? A treaty 
of amity is condemned because it was not made by a foe, and in 
the spirit of one. The same gentleman, at the same instant, re- 
peats a very prevailing objection, that no treaty should be made 
with the enemy of France. No treaty, exclaim others, should be 
made with a monarch or a despot : there will be no naval security 
while those sea-robbers domineer on the ocean : their den must 
be destroyed : that nation must be extirpated. 

I like this, sir, because it is sincerity. With feelings such as 
these, we do not pant for treaties. Such passions seek nothing, 
and will be content with nothing, but the destruction of their ob- 
ject. If a treaty left king George his island, it would not answer ; 
not if he stipulated to pay rent for it. It has been said, the world 
ought to rejoice if Britain was sunk in the sea ; if where there are 
now men, and wealth, and laws, and liberty, there was no more than 
a sand bank for the sea-monsters to fatten on; a space for the 
storms of the ocean to mingle in conflict. 

1 object nothing to the good sense or humanity of all this. I 
yield the point, that this is a proof that the age of reason is in 
progress. Let it be philanthropy, let it be patriotism, if you will ; 
but it is no indication that any treaty would be approved. The 
difficulty is not to overcome the objections to the terms ; it is to 
restrain the repugnance to any stipulations of amity with the party. 

Having alluded to the rival of Great Britain, 1 am not unwilling 
to explain myself; I affect no concealment, and I have practised 
none. While those two great nations agitate all Europe with 
their quarrels, they will both equally desire, and with any chance 
of success, equally endeavor to create, an influence in America. 
Each will exert all its arts to range our strength on its own side. 
How is this to be effected ? Our government is a demdcratical 
republic. It will not be disposed to pursue a system of politics, 
in subservience to either France or England, in opposition to the 
general wishes of the citizens; and, if congress should adopt such 
measures, they would not be pursued long, nor with much success. 
From the nature of our government, popularity is the instrument 
of foreign influence. Without it, all is labor and disappointment. 
With that mighty auxiliary, foreign intrigue finds agents, not only 
volunteers, but competitors for employment, and any thing like re- 
luctance is understood to be a crime. Has Britain this means of 
influence? Certainly not. If her gold could buy adherents, their 
becoming such would deprive them of all political power and im- 
portance. They would not wield popularity is a weapon, but 

O 



V 



10b 



MR. AMES'S SPEECH ON 



would fall under it. Britain has no influence, and, for the reasons 
just given, can have none. She has enough ; and God forbid she 
ever should have more. France, possessed of popular enthusiasm, 
of party attachments, has had, and still has, too much influence on 
our politics — any foreign influence is too much, and ought to be 
destroyed. I detest the man and disdain the spirit that can bend 
to a mean subserviency to the views of any nation. It is enough 
to be Americans. That character comprehends our duties, and 
ought to engross our attachments. 

But I would not be misunderstood. I would not break the al- 
liance with France ; I would not have the connection between the 
two countries even a cold one. It should be cordial and sincere ; 
but I would banish that influence, which, by acting on the passions 
of the citizens, may acquire a power over the government. 

It is no bad proof of the merit of the treaty, that, under all these 
unfavorable circumstances, it should be so well approved. In 
spite of first impressions, in spite of misrepresentation and party 
clamor, inquiry has multiplied its advocates ; and at last the pub- 
lic sentiment appears to me clearly preponderating to its side. 

On the most careful review of the several branches of the trea- 
ty, those which respect political arrangements, the spoliations on 
our trade, and the regulation of commerce, there is little to be ap- 
prehended. The evil, aggravated as it is by party, is little in de- 
gree, and short in duration ; two years from the end of the Eu- 
ropean war. I ask, and I would ask the question significantly, 
What are the inducements to reject the treaty? What great ob- 
ject is to be gained, and fairly gained by it ? If, however, as to 
the merits of the treaty, candor should suspend its approbation, 
what is there to hold patriotism, a moment in balance, as to the 
violation of it ? Nothing ; I repeat confidently, nothing. There 
is nothing before us in that event but confusion and dishonor. 

But before I attempt to develop those consequences, I must 
put myself at ease by some explanation. 

Nothing is worse received among men than the confutation of 
their opinions ; and, of these, none are more dear or more vulner- 
able than their political opinions. To say that a proposition leads 
to shame and ruin, is almost equivalent to a charge that the sup- 
porters of it intend to produce them. I throw myself upon the 
magnanimity and candor of those who hear me. I cannot do jus- 
tice to my subject without exposing, as forcibly as I can, all the 
evils in prospect. I readily admit, that in every science, and most 
of all in politics, error springs from other sources than the want of 
sense or integrity. I despise indiscriminate professions' of candor 
and respect. There are individuals opposed to me of whom I am 
not bound to say any thing. But of many, perhaps of a majority 



THE BRITISH TREATY. 



107 



of the opposers of the appropriations, it gives me pleasure to de- 
clare, they possess my confidence and regard. There are among 
them individuals for whom I entertain a cordial affection. 

The consequences of refusing to make provision for the treaty 
are not all to be foreseen. By rejecting, vast interests are com- 
mitted to the sport of the winds. Chance becomes the arbiter of 
events, and it is forbidden to human foresight to count their num- 
ber, or measure their extent. Before w^e resolve to leap into this 
abyss, so dark and so profound, it becomes us to pause and reflect 
upon such of the dangers as are obvious and inevitable. If this 
assembly should be wrought into a temper to defy these conse- 
quences, it is vain, it is deceptive, to pretend that we can escape 
them. It is worse than weakness to say, that as to public faith 
our vote has already settled the question. Another tribunal than 
our own is already erected. The public opinion, not merely of 
our own country, but of the enlightened world, will pronounce a 
judgment that we cannot resist, that we dare not even affect 
to despise. 

Well may I urge it to men, who know the worth of character, 
that it is no trivia] calamity to have it contested. Refusing to do 
w T hat the treaty stipulates shall be done, opens the controversy. 
Even if we should stand justified at last, a character that is vindi- 
cated is something worse than it stood before, unquestioned and 
unquestionable. Like the plaintiff in an action of slander, we re- 
cover a reputation disfigured by invective, and even tarnished by 
too much handling. In the combat for the honor of the nation, it 
may receive some wounds, which, though they should heal, will 
leave scars. I need not say, for surely the feelings of every bosom 
have anticipated, that we cannot guard this sense of national honor, 
this everlasting fire which alone keeps patriotism warm in the 
heart, with a sensibility too vigilant and jealous. 

If, by executing the treaty, there is no possibility of dishonor, 
and if, by rejecting, there is some foundation for doubt, and for 
reproach, it is not for me to measure, it is for your own feelings to 
estimate, the vast distance that divides the one side of the alter- 
native from the other. 

If, therefore, we should enter on the examination of the ques- 
tion of duty and obligation with some feelings of prepossession, I 
do not hesitate to say, they are such as we ought to have : it is 
an after-inquiry to determine whether they are such as ought 
finally to be resisted. 

The resolution (Mr. Blount's) is less explicit than the consti- 
tution. Its patrons should have made it more so, if possible, if 
they had any doubts, or meant the public should entertain none. 
Is it the sense of that vote, as some have insinuated, that we claim 
a right, for any cause or no cause at all but our own sovereign 



108 



MR. AMES'S SPEECH ON 



will and pleasure, to refuse to execute, and thereby to annul the 
stipulations of a treaty — that we have nothing to regard but the 
expediency or inexpediency of the measure, being absolutely free 
from all obligation by compact to give it our sanction ? A doc- 
trine so monstrous, so shameless, is refuted by being avowed. 
There are no words you could express it in that would not con- 
vey both confutation and reproach. It would outrage the igno- 
rance of the tenth century to believe ; it would baffle the casuistiy 
of a papal council to vindicate. I venture to say it is impossible : 
no less impossible than that we should desire to assert the scanda- 
lous privilege of being free after we have pledged our honor. 

It is doing injustice to the resolution of the house (which I 
dislike on many accounts) to strain the interpretation of it to this 
extravagance. The treaty-making power is declared by it to be 
vested exclusively in the president and senate. "Will any man 
in his senses affirm, that it can be a treaty before it has any bind- 
ing force or obligation ? If it has no binding force upon us, it has 
none upon Great Britain. Let candor answer, Is Great Britain 
free from any obligation to deliver the posts in June, and are we 
willing to signify to her that we think so ? Is it with that nation 
a question of mere expediency or inexpediency to do it, and that 
too even after we have done all that depends upon us to give the 
treaty effect ? No sober man believes this. No one, who would 
not join in condemning the faithless proceedings of that nation, if 
such a doctrine should be avowed and carried into practice — and 
why complain, if Great Britain is not bound ? There can be no 
breach of faith where none is plighted. I shall be told that she is 
bound. Surely it follows, that if she is bound to performance, our 
nation is under a similar obligation ; if both parties be not obliged, 
neither is obliged ; it is no compact, no treaty. This is a dictate 
of law and common sense, and every jury in the country has sanc- 
tioned it on oath. 

It cannot be a treaty, and yet no treaty ; a bargain, yet no prom- 
ise. If it is a promise, I am not to read a lecture to show why an 
honest man will keep his promise. 

The reason of the thing, and the words of the resolution of the 
house, imply, that the United States engage their good faith in a 
treaty. We disclaim, say the majority, the treaty-making power ; 
we of course disclaim (they ought to say) every doctrine that 
would put a negative upon the doings of that power. It is the 
prerogative of folly alone to maintain both sides of a proposition. 

Will any man affirm the American nation is engaged by good 
faith to the British nation ; but that engagement is nothing to this 
house ? Such a man is not to be reasoned with. Such a doc 
trine is a coat of mail, that would turn the edge of all the weapons 
of argument, if they were sharper than a sword. Will it be im- 



THE BRITISH TREATY. 109 

agined, the king of Great Britain and the president are mutually 
bound by the treaty, but the two nations are free ? 

It is one thing for this house to stand in a position that presents 
an opportunity to break the faith of America, and another to es- 
tablish a principle that will justify the deed. 

We feel less repugnance to believe that any other body is bound 
by obligation than our own. There is not a man here who does 
not say that Great Britain is bound by treaty. Bring it nearer 
home. Is the senate bound ? Just as much as the house, and 
no more. Suppose the senate, as part of the treaty power, by 
ratifying a treaty on Monday, pledges the public faith to do a cer- 
tain act. Then, in their ordinary capacity as a branch of the le- 
gislature, the senate is called upon on Tuesday to perform that 
act, for example, an appropriation of money — is the senate (so 
lately under obligation) now free to agree or disagree to the act ? 
If the twenty ratifying senators should rise up and avow this prin- 
ciple, saying, " We struggle for liberty ; we will not be ciphers, mere 
puppets," and give their votes accordingly, would not shame blister 
their tongues ? would not infamy tingle in their ears ? would not 
their country, which they bad insulted and dishonored, though it 
should be silent and forgiving, be a revolutionary tribunal, a rack 
on which their own reflections would stretch them ? 

This, sir, is a cause that would be dishonored and betrayed, if I 
contented myself with appealing only to the understanding. It is 
too cold, and its processes are too slow for the occasion. I desire 
to thank God, that since he has given me an intellect so fallible, 
he has impressed upon me an instinct that is sure. On a question 
of shame and honor, reasoning is sometimes useless, and worse. I 
feel the decision in my pulse — if it throws no light upon the brain, 
it kindles a fire at the heart. 

It is not easy to deny, it is impossible to doubt, that a treaty 
imposes an obligation on the American nation. It would be 
childish to consider the president and senate obliged, and the na- 
tion and the house free. What is the obligation — perfect or im- 
perfect ? If perfect, the debate is brought to a conclusion. If 
imperfect, how large a part of our faith is pawned ? Is half our 
honor put at risk, and is that half too cheap to be redeemed ? How 
long has this hair-splitting subdivision of good faith been discover- 
ed, and why has it escaped the researches of the writers on the 
law of nations ? Shall we add a new chapter to that law, or in- 
sert this doctrine as a supplement to, or more properly a repeal of, 
the ten commandments ? 

The principles and the example of the British parliament have 
been alleged to coincide with the doctrine of those who deny the 
obligation of the treaty. I have not had the health to make very 
laborious researches into this subject. I will, however, sketch rav 
10 



110 



MR. AMES'S SPEECH ON 



view of it. Several instances have been noticed ; but the treaty of 
Utrecht is the only one that seems to be at all applicable. It has 
been answered, that the conduct of parliament, in that celebrated 
example, affords no sanction to our refusal to carry the treaty into 
effect. The obligation of the treaty of Utrecht has been under- 
stood to depend on the concurrence of parliament, as a condition 
to its becoming of force. If that opinion should, however, appear 
incorrect, still the precedent proves, not that the treaty of Utrecht 
wanted obligation, but that parliament disregarded it ; a proof, not 
of the construction of the treaty-making power, but of the viola- 
tion of a national engagement. Admitting, still further, that the 
parliament claimed and exercised its power, not as a breach of 
faith, but as a matter of constitutional right, I reply, that the anal- 
ogy between parliament and congress totally fails. The nature of 
the British government may require and justify a course of pro- 
ceeding in respect to treaties, that is unwarrantable here. 

The British government is a mixed one. The king, at the 
head of the army, of the hierarchy, with an ample civil list, hered- 
itary, unresponsible, and possessing the prerogative of peace and 
war, may be properly observed with some jealousy in respect to 
the exercise of the treaty-making power. It seems, and perhaps 
from a spirit of caution on this account, to be their doctrine, that 
treaties bind the nation, but are not to be regarded by the courts 
of law, until laws have been passed conformably to them. Our 
concurrence has expressly regulated the matter differently. The 
concurrence of parliament is necessary to treaties becoming laws in 
England, gentlemen say ; and here the senate, representing the 
states, must concur in treaties. The constitution and the reason 
of the case make the concurrence of the senate as effectual as the 
sanction of parliament ; and why not ? The senate is an elective 
body, and the approbation of a majority of the states affords the 
nation as ample security against the abuse of the treaty -making 
power, as the British nation can enjoy in the control of par- 
liament. 

Whatever doubt there may be as to the parliamentary doctrine 
of the obligation of treaties in Great Britain (and perhaps there is 
some), there is none in their books, or their modern practice. 
Blackstone represents treaties as of the highest obligation, when 
ratified by the king ; and for almost a century, there has been no 
instance of opposition by parliament to this doctrine. Their trea- 
ties have been uniformly carried into effect, although many have 
been ratified, of a nature most obnoxious to party, and have pro- 
duced louder clamor than we have lately witnessed. The exam- 
ple of England, therefore, fairly examined, does not warrant — it 
dissuades us from a negative vote. 

Gentlemen have said, with spirit, Whatever the true doctrine of 



THE BRITISH TREATY. 



Ill 



our constitution may be, Great Britain has no right to complain or 
to dictate an interpretation. The sense of the American nation, 
as to the treaty power, is to be received by all foreign nations. 
This is very true as a maxim ; but the fact is against those who 
vouch it. The sense of the American nation is not as the vote of 
the house has declared it. Our claim to some agency in giving 
force and obligation to treaties is, beyond all kind of controversy, 
novel. The sense of the nation is probably against it. The sense 
of the government certainly is. The president denies it on con- 
stitutional grounds, and therefore cannot ever accede to our inter- 
pretation. The senate ratified the treaty, and cannot without dis- 
honor adopt it, as I have attempted to show. Where, then, do 
they find the proof, that this is the American sense of the treaty- 
making power, which is to silence the murmurs of Great Britain ? 
Is it because a majority of two or three, or at most of four or five, 
of this house will reject the treaty ? Is it thus the sense of our 
nation is to be recognized ? Our government may thus be stop- 
ped in its movements — a struggle for power may thus commence, 
and the event of the conflict may decide who is the victor, and the 
quiet possessor of the treaty power. But, at present, it is beyond 
all credibility, that our vote, by a bare majority, should be believ- 
ed to do any thing better than to imbitter our divisions, and to tear 
up the settled foundations of our departments. 

If the obligation of a treaty be complete, I am aware that cases 
sometimes exist which will justify a nation in refusing a compliance. 
Are our liberties, gentlemen demand, to be bartered away by a 
treaty, — and is there no remedy ? There is. Extremes are not. 
to be supposed ; but, when they happen, they make the law for 
themselves. No such extreme can be pretended in this instance ; 
and if it existed, the authority it would confer to throw off the ob- 
ligation would rest where the obligation itself resides — in the na- 
tion. This house is not the nation — it is not the whole delegated 
authority of the nation. Being only a part of that authority, its 
right to act for the whole society obviously depends on the concur- 
rence of the other two branches. If they refuse to concur, a trea- 
ty, once made, remains in full force, although a breach on the part 
of a foreign nation would confer upon our own a right to forbear 
the execution. I repeat it ; even in that case the act of this house 
cannot be admitted as the act of the nation ; and if the president 
and senate should not concur, the treaty would be obligatory. 

I put a case that will not fail to produce conviction. Our trea- 
ty with France engages that free bottoms shall make free goods ; 
and how has it been kept ? As such engagements will ever be in 
time of war. France has set it aside, and pleads imperious neces- 
sity. We have no navy to enforce the observance of such arti- 
cles, and paper barriers are weak against the violence of tho^e 



112 



MR. AMES'S SPEECH ON 



who are on the scramble for enemies' goods on the high seas. 
The breach of any article of a treaty by one nation gives an un- 
doubted right to the other to renounce the whole treaty. But 
has one branch of the government that right, or must it reside with 
the whole authority of the nation ? What if the senate should re- 
solve, that the French treaty is broken, and therefore null and of 
no effect ? The answer is obvious ; you would deny their sole au- 
thority. That branch of the legislature has equal power in this 
regard with the house of representatives. One branch alone 
cannot express the will of the nation. 

A right to annul a treaty, because a foreign nation has broken 
its articles, is only like the case of a sufficient cause to repeal a 
law. In both cases the branches of our government must concur 
in the orderly way, or the law and the treaty will remain. 

The very cases supposed by my adversaries in this argument 
conclude against themselves. They will persist in confounding 
ideas that should be kept distinct ; they will suppose that the house 
of representatives has no power unless it has all power. The 
house is nothing if it be not the whole government — the nation. 

On every hypothesis, therefore, the conclusion is not to be re- 
sisted ; we are either to execute this treaty, or break our faith. 

To expatiate on the value of public faith may pass with some 
men for declamation — to such men I have nothing to say. To 
others I will urge — -can any circumstance mark upon a people 
more turpitude and debasement ? Can any thing tend more to 
make men think themselves mean, or degrade to a lower point 
their estimation of virtue and their standard of action ? 

It would not merely demoralize mankind ; it tends to break all 
the ligaments of society, to dissolve that mysterious charm which 
attracts individuals to the nation, and to inspire in its stead a re- 
pulsive sense of shame and disgust. 

What is patriotism ? Is it a narrow affection for the spot where 
a man was born ? Are the very clods where we tread entitled to 
this ardent preference because they are greener ? P* T o, sir ; this 
is not the character of the virtue, and it soars higher for its object. 
It is an extended self-love, mingling with all the enjoyments of 
life, and twisting itself with the minutest filaments of the heart. It 
is thus we obey the laws of society, because they are the laws of 
virtue. In their authority we see, not the array of force and ter- 
ror, but the venerable image of our country's honor. Every good 
citizen makes that honor his own, and cherishes it not only as pre- 
cious, but as sacred. He is willing to risk his life in its defence, 
and is conscious that he gains protection while he gives it. For 
what rights of a citizen will be deemed inviolable when a state re- 
nounces the principles that constitute their security ? Or, if his 
.ife should not be invaded, what would its enjoyments be in a 



THE BRITISH TREATY. 



113 



country odious in the eyes of strangers and dishonored in his own ? 
Could he look with affection and veneration to such a country as 
nis parent ? The sense of having one would die within him ; he 
would blush for his patriotism, if he retained any, and justly, 
for it would be a vice. He would be a banished man in his na- 
tive land. 

I see no exception to the respect that is paid among nations to 
the law of good faith. If there are cases, in this enlightened peri- 
od, when it is violated, there are none when it is decried. It is 
the philosophy of politics, the religion of governments. It is ob- 
served by barbarians — a whiff of tobacco smoke, or a string of 
beads, gives not merely binding force, but sanctity to treaties. 
Even in Algiers, a truce may be bought for money ; but, when rat- 
ified, even Algiers is too wise, or too just, to disown and annul its 
obligation. Thus, we see, neither the ignorance of savages, nor 
the principles of an association for piracy and rapine, permit a na- 
tion to despise its engagements. If, sir, there could be a resurrec- 
tion from the foot of the gallows, if the victims of justice could 
live again, collect together, and form a society, they would, howev- 
er loath, soon find themselves obliged to make justice, that justice 
under which they fell, the fundamental law of their state. They 
would perceive it was their interest to make others respect, and 
they would therefore soon pay some respect themselves to the ob- 
ligations of good faith. 

It is painful, I hope it is superfluous, to make even the supposi- 
tion, that America should furnish the occasion of this opprobrium. 
No, let me not even imagine, that a republican government, sprung, 
as our own is, from a people enlightened and uncorrupted, a gov- 
ernment whose origin is right, and whose daily discipline is duty, 
can, upon solemn debate, make its option to be faithless — can dare 
to act what despots dare not avow, what our own example evinces, 
the states of Barbary are unsuspected of. No, let me rather make 
the supposition, that Great Britain refuses to execute the treaty, 
after we have done every thing to carry it into effect. Is there 
any language of reproach pungent enough to express your com- 
mentary on the fact ? What would you say, or rather what would 
you not say? Would you not tell them, wherever an Englishman 
might travel, shame would stick to him — he would disown his 
country. You would exclaim, England, proud of your wealth, 
and arrogant in the possession of power — blush for these distinc- 
tions, which become the vehicles of your dishonor. Such a nation 
might truly say to corruption, Thou art my father, and to the worm, 
Thou art my mother and my sister. We should say of such a race 
of men, their name is a heavier burden than their debt. 

I can scarcely persuade myself to believe, that the consideration 
10* 



114 



MR. AMES'S SPEECH ON 



I have suggested requires the aid of any auxiliary. But, unfortu- 
nately, auxiliary arguments are at hand. Five millions of dollars, 
and probably more, on the score of spoliations committed on our 
commerce, depend upon the treaty. The treaty offers the only 
prospect of indemnity. Such redress is promised as the merchants 
place some confidence in. Will you interpose and frustrate that 
hope ; leaving to many families nothing but beggary and despair ? 
It is a smooth proceeding to take a vote in this body : it takes less 
than half an hour to call the yeas and nays and reject the treaty. 
But what is the effect of it ? What, but this ? the very men for- 
merly so loud for redress ; such fierce champions, that even to ask 
for justice was too mean and too slow, now turn their capricious 
fury upon the sufferers, and say, by their vote, to them and their 
families, No longer eat bread ; petitioners, go home and starve ; we 
cannot satisfy your wrongs and our resentments. 

Will you pay the sufferers out of the treasury ? No. The an- 
swer was given two years ago, and appears on our journals. Will 
you give them letters of marque and reprisal to pay themselves 
by force ? No ; that is war. Besides, it would be an opportunity 
for those who have already lost much to lose more. Will you go 
to war to avenge their injury ? If you do, the war will leave you 
no money to indemnify them. If it should be unsuccessful, you 
will aggravate existing evils ; if successful, your enemy will have 
no treasure left to give our merchants ; the first losses will be con- 
founded with much greater, and be forgotten. At the end of a 
war there must be a negotiation, which is the very point we have 
already gained ; and why relinquish it ? And who will be confi- 
dent that the terms of the negotiation, after a desolating war, would 
be more acceptable to another house of representatives, than the 
treaty before us? Members and opinions may be so changed, that 
the treaty would then be rejected for being what the present ma 
jority say it should be. Whether we shall go on making treaties 
.and refusing to execute them, I know not. Of this I am certain, 
it will be very difficult to exercise the treaty-making power, on 
the new principles, with much reputation or advantage to the 
country. 

The refusal of the posts (inevitable if we reject the treaty) is a 
measure too decisive in its nature to be neutral in its consequences. 
From great causes we are to look for great effects. A plain 
and obvious one will be, the price of the western lands will fall 
Settlers will not choose to fix their habitation on a field of battle 
Those who talk so much of the interest of the United States, 
should calculate how deeply it will be affected by rejecting the 
treaty ; how vast a tract of wild land will almost cease to be prop- 
erty. This loss, let it be observed, will fall upon a fund expressly 



THE BRITISH TREATY. 



115 



devoted to sink the national debt. What, then, are we called upon 
to do ? However the form of the vote and the protestations of 
many may disguise the proceeding, our resolution is in substance, 
and it deserves to wear the title of a resolution to prevent the sale 
of the western lands and the discharge of the public debt. 

Will the tendency to Indian hostilities be contested by any one ? 
Experience gives the answer. The frontiers were scourged with 
war till the negotiation with Great Britain was far advanced, and 
then the state of hostility ceased. Perhaps the public agents of 
both nations are innocent of fomenting the Indian war, and perhaps 
they are not. We ought not, however, to expect that neighboring 
nations, highly irritated against each other, will neglect the friend- 
ship of the savages ; the traders will gain an influence and will 
abase it ; and who is ignorant that their passions are easily raised, 
and hardly restrained from violence ? Their situation will oblige 
them to choose between this country and Great Britain, in case the 
treaty should be rejected. They will not be our friends, and at 
the same time the friends of our enemies. 

But am I reduced to the necessity of proving this point ? Cer- 
tainly the very men who charged the Indian war on the detention 
of the posts, will call for no other proof than the recital of their 
own speeches. It is remembered with what emphasis, with what 
acrimony, they expatiated on the burden of taxes, and the drain of 
blood and treasure into the western country, in consequence of 
Britain's holding the posts. Until the posts are restored, they ex- 
claimed, the treasury and the frontiers must bleed. 

If any, against all these proofs, should maintain that the peace 
with the Indians will be stable without the posts, ,to them I will 
urge another reply. From arguments calculated to produce con- 
viction, I will appeal directly to the hearts of those who hear me, 
and ask, whether it is not already planted there. I resort espe- 
cially to the convictions of the western gentlemen, whether, sup- 
posing no posts and no treaty, the settlers will remain in security. 
Can they take it upon them to say, that an Indian peace, under 
these circumstances, will prove firm ? No, sir : it will not be peace, 
but a sword : it will be no better than a lure to draw victims with- 
in the reach of the tomahawk. 

On this theme, my emotions are unutterable. If I could find 
words for them — if my powers bore any proportion to my zeal ~~ I 
would swell my voice to such a note of remonstrance, it should 
reach every log-house beyond the mountains. I would say to the 
inhabitants, Wake from your false security : your cruel dangers, 
your more cruel apprehensions, are soon to be renewed : the 
wounds, yet unhealed, are to be torn open again : in the day time, 
your path through the woods will be ambushed : the darkness of 



116 



MR. AMES'S SPEECH ON 



midnight will glitter with the blaze of your dwellings. You are a 
father — the blood of your sons shall fatten your cornfield : you 
are a mother — the war-whoop shall wake the sleep of the cradle. 

On this subject you need not suspect any deception on your 
feelings. It is a spectacle of horror, which cannot be overdrawn. 
If you have nature in your hearts, it will speak a language com- 
pared with which all I have said or can say will be poor and 
frigid. 

Will it be whispered that the treaty has made me a new cham- 
pion for the protection of the frontiers ? It is known that my voice 
as well as vote have been uniformly given in conformity with the 
ideas I have expressed. Protection is the right of the frontiers ; it 
is our duty to give it. 

Who will accuse me of wandering out of the subject ? Who 
will say that I exaggerate the tendencies of our measures ? Will 
any one answer by a sneer, that all this is idle preaching ? Will 
any one deny, that we are bound, and I would hope to good pur- 
pose, by the most solemn sanctions of duty, for the vote we give ? 
Are despots alone to be reproached for unfeeling indifference to 
the tears and blood of their subjects ? Are republicans unrespon- 
sible ? Have the principles, on which you ground the reproach 
upon cabinets and kings, no practical influence, no binding force ? 
Are they merely themes of idle declamation, introduced to deco^ 
rate the morality of a newspaper essay, or to furnish pretty topics 
of harangue from the windows of that state-house ? I trust it is 
neither too presumptuous nor too late to ask, Can you put the 
dearest interest of society at risk without guilt, and without 
remorse ? u 

It is vain to offer as an excuse, that public men are not to be 
reproached for the evils that may happen to ensue from their 
measures. This is very true, where they are unforeseen or inev- 
itable. Those I have depicted are not unforeseen : they are so 
far from inevitable, we are going to bring them into being by our 
vote. We choose the consequences, and become as justly an- 
swerable for them as for the measure that we know will produce 
them. 

By rejecting the posts, we light the savage fires — we bind the 
victims. This day we undertake to render account to the widows 
and orphans whom our decision will make, to the wretches that 
will be roasted at the stake, to our country, and I do not deem k 
too serious to say, to conscience and to God. We are answerable, 
and if duty be any thing more than a word of imposture, if con- 
science be not a bugbear, we are preparing to make ourselves as 
wretched as our country. 

There is no mistake in this case ; there can be none. Experi- 



THE BRITISH TREATY. 



117 



ence has already been the prophet of events, and the cries of our fu- 
ture victims have already reached us. The western inhabitants 
are not a silent and uncomplaining sacrifice. The voice of hu- 
manity issues from the shade of their wilderness. It exclaims, 
that while one hand is held up to reject this treaty , the other 
grasps a tomahawk. It summons our imagination to the scenes 
that will open. It is no great effort of the imagination to con- 
ceive, that events so near are already begun. I can fancy that I 
listen to the yells of savage vengeance, and the shrieks of torture. 
Already they seem to sigh in the west wind — already they min- 
gle with every echo from the mountains. 

It is not the part of prudence to be inattentive to the tendencies 
of measures. Where there is any ground to, fear that these will 
be pernicious, wisdom and duty forbid that we should underrate 
them. If we reject the treaty, will our peace be as safe as if we 
executed it with good faith ? I do honor to the intrepid spirit of 
those who say it will. It was formerly understood to constitute 
the excellence of a man's faith to believe without evidence and 
against it. 

But as opinions on this article are changed, and w T e are called 
to act for our country, it becomes us to explore the dangers that 
will attend its peace, and to avoid them if we can. 

Few of us here, and fewer still in proportion of our constitu- 
ents, will doubt, that, by rejecting, all those dangers will be ag- 
gravated. 

The idea of war is treated as a bugbear. This levity is at least 
unseasonable, and most of all unbecoming some who resort to it. 

Who has forgotten the philippics of 1794? The cry then was 
reparation — no envoy — no treaty — no tedious delays. Now, it 
seems, the passion subsides, or at least the hurry to satisfy it. 
Great Britain, say they, will not wage war upon us. 

In 1794, it was urged by those who now say, no war, that if 
we built frigates, or resisted the piracies of Algiers, we could not 
expect peace. Now they give excellent comfort truly. Great 
Britain has seized our vessels and cargoes to the amount of mil- 
lions ; she holds the posts ; she interrupts our trade, say they, as 
a neutral nation ; and these gentlemen, formerly so fierce for re- 
dress, assure us, in terms of the sweetest consolation, Great Britain 
will bear all this patiently. But let me ask the late champions of 
our rights, will our nation bear it ? Let others exult because the 
•aggressor will let our wrongs sleep forever. Will it add — it is m) 
duty to ask — >to the patience and quiet of our citizens to see their 
rights abandoned ? Will not the disappointment of their hopes, 
so long patronized by the government, now in the crisis of 
their being realized, convert all their passions into fury and 
despair ? 



118 



MR. AMES'S SPEECH ON 



Are the posts to remain forever in the possession of Great Brit- 
ain ? Let those who reject them, when the treaty offers them to 
our hands, say, if they choose, they are of no importance. If they 
are, will they take them by force ? The argument I am urging 
would then come to a point. To use force is war. To talk of 
treaty again is too absurd. Posts and redress must come from 
voluntary good will, treaty or war. 

The conclusion is plain, if the state of peace shall continue, so 
will the British possession of the posts. 

Look again at this state of things. On the sea-coast, vast losses 
uncompensated ; on the frontier, Indian war, actual encroachment 
on our territory ; every where discontent — resentments tenfold 
more fierce because they will be impotent and humbled ; national 
scorn and abasement. 

The disputes of the old treaty of 1783, being left to rankle, will 
revive the almost extinguished animosities of that period. Wars, 
in all countries, and most of all in such as are free, arise from the 
impetuosity of the public feelings. The despotism of Turkey is 
often obliged by clamor to unsheath the sword. War might per- 
haps be delayed, but could not be prevented. The causes of it 
would remain, would be aggravated, would be multiplied, and soon 
become intolerable. More captures, more impressments would 
swell the list of our wrongs, and the current of our ra^e. I make 
no calculation of the arts of those whose employment it has been, 
on former occasions, to fan the fire. 1 say nothing of the foreign 
money and emissaries that might foment the spirit of hostility, be- 
cause the state of things will naturally run to violence. With less 
than their former exertion, they would be successful. 

AVill our government be able to temper and restrain the turbu- 
lence of such a crisis ? The government, alas ! will be in no ca- 
pacity to govern. A divided people — and divided councils ! 
Shall we cherish the spirit of peace, or show the energies of war? 
Shall we make cur adversary afraid of our strength, or dispose him, 
by the measures of resentment and broken faith, to respect our 
rights ? Do gentlemen rely on the state of peace because both na- 
tions will be worse disposed to keep it ; because injuries, and insults 
still harder to endure, will be mutually offered ? 

Such a state of things will exist, if we should long avoid war, as 
will be worse than war. Peace without security, accumulation of 
injury without redress, or the hope of it, resentment against the 
aggressor, contempt for ourselves, intestine discord and anarchy. 
Worse than this need not be apprehended, for if worse could hap- 
pen, anarchy would bring it. Is this the peace gentlemen under- 
take with such fearless confidence to maintain ? Is this the station 
of American dignity, which the high-spirited champions of our na- 
tional independence and honor could endure — nay, which they are 



THE BRITISH TREATY. 



119 



anxious and almost violent to seize for the country ? What is 
there in the treaty that could humble us so low ? Are they the 
men to swallow their resentments, who so lately were choking 
with them ? If, in the case contemplated by them, it should be 
peace, I do not hesitate to declare it ought not to be peace. 

Is there any thing in the prospect of the interior state of the i 
country to encourage us to aggravate the dangers of a war? 
Would not the shock of that evil produce another, and shake down 
the feeble and .then unbraced structure of our government ? Is 
this a chimera ? Is it going off the ground of matter of fact to say, 
the rejection of the appropriation proceeds upon the doctrine of a 
civil war of the departments ? Two branches have ratified a treaty, 
and we are £oino; to set it aside. How is this disorder in the ma- 
chine to be rectified ? While it exists, its movements must stop, 
and when we talk of a remedy, is that any other than the formi- 
dable one of a revolutionary interposition of the people ? And is 
this, in the judgment even of my opposers, to execute, to preserve 
the constitution and the public order ? Is this the state of hazard, 
if not of convulsion, which they can have the courage to contem- 
plate and to brave, or beyond which their penetration can reach 
and see the issue ? They seem to believe, and they act as if they 
believed, that our union, our peace, our liberty are invulnerable 
and immortal — as if our happy state was not to be disturbed by our 
dissensions, and that we are not capable of falling from it by our 
unworthiness. Some of them have no doubt better nerves and 
better discernment than mine. They can see the bright aspects 
and happy consequences of all this array of horrors. They can 
see intestine discords, our government disorganized, our wrongs 
aggravated, multiplied and unredressed, peace with dishonor, or 
war without justice, union or resources, in " the calm lights of mild 
philosophy." 

But whatever they may anticipate as the next measure of pru 
dence- and safety, they have explained nothing to the house. 
After rejecting the treaty, what is to be the next step ? They 
must have foreseen what ought to be done ; they have doubtless 
resolved what to propose. Why, then, are they silent ? Dare 
they not avow their plan of conduct, or do they wait till our prog- 
ress towards confusion shall guide them in forming it ? 

Let me cheer the mind, weary, no doubt, and ready to despond 
on this prospect, by presenting another, which it is yet in our pow- 
er to realize. Is it possible for a real American to look at the 
prosperity of this country without some desire for its continuance, 
without some respect for the measures which, many will say, pro- 
duced, and all will confess, have preserved it ? Will he not feel 
some dread, that a change of system will reverse the scene ? The 



120 



MR. AMES'S SPEECH ON 



well-grounded fears of our citizens, in 1794, were removed by the 
treaty, but are not forgotten. Then they deemed war nearly in- 
evitable, and would not this adjustment have been considered, at 
that day, as a happy escape from the calamity ? The great inter- 
est and the general desire of our people was to enjoy the advan- 
tages of neutrality. This instrument, however misrepresented, 
affords America that inestimable security. The causes of our dis 
putes are either cut up by the roots, or referred to a new negotia- 
tion after the end of the European war. This was gaining every 
thing, because it confirmed our neutrality, by which our citizens 
are gaining every thing. This alone would justify the engage- 
ments of the government. For, when the fiery vapors of the war 
lowered in the skirts of our horizon, all our wishes were concentred 
in this one, that we might escape the desolation of the storm. 
This treaty, like a rainbow on the edge of the cloud, marked to 
our eyes the space where it was raging, and afforded, at the same 
time, the sure prognostic of fair weather. If we reject it, the vivid 
colors will grow pale ; it will be a baleful meteor, portending tem- 
pest and war. 

Let us not hesitate, then, to agree to the appropriation to carry 
it into faithful execution. Thus we shall save the faith of our 
nation, secure its peace, and diffuse the spirit of confidence and 
enterprise that will augment its prosperity. The progress of 
wealth and improvement is wonderful, and some will think, too 
rapid. The field for exertion is fruitful and vast, and if peace and 
good government should be preserved, the acquisitions of our citi- 
zens are not so pleasing as the proofs of their industry, as the in- 
struments of their future success. The rewards of exertion go to 
augment its power. Profit is every hour becoming capital. The 
vast crop of our neutrality is all seed-wheat, and is sown again to 
swell, almost beyond calculation, the future harvest of prosperity. 
And in this progress, what seems to be fiction is found to fall short 
of experience. 

T rose to speak under impressions that I would have resisted if 
I could. Those who see me will believe, that the reduced state 
of my health has unfitted me, almost equally, for much exertion 
of body or mind. Unprepared for debate, by careful reflection in 
my retirement, or by long attention here, I thought the resolution 
I had taken to sit silent was imposed by necessity, and would cost 
me no effort to maintain. With a mind thus vacant of ideas, and 
sinking, as I really am, under a sense of weakness, I imagined the 
very desire of speaking was extinguished by the persuasion that I 
had nothing to say. Yet when I come to the moment of deciding 
the vote, I start back with dread from the edge of the pit into 
which w T e are plunging. In my view, even the minutes I have 



THE BRITISH TREATY. 



121 



spent in expostulation, have their value, because they protract the 
crisis, and the short period in which alone we may resolve to 
escape it. 

I have thus been led, by my feelings, to speak more at length 
than I had intended. Yet I have, perhaps, as little personal in- 
terest in the event as any one here. There is, I believe, no mem- 
ber who will not think his chance to be a witness of the conse- 
quences greater than mine. If, however, the vote should pass to 
reject, and a spirit should rise, as it will, with the public disordeis, 
to make confusion worse confounded, even I, slender and almost 
broken as my hold upon life is, may outlive the government and 
constitution of my country. 

1 1 



SPEECH OF EDWARD LIVINGSTON, 



ON 

THE ALIEN BILL, 

DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITEE 
STATES, JUNE 19, 1798. 



By this bill, it was provided that the president might order dangerous or 
suspected aliens to depart out of the territory of the United States. The 
penalty, for disobedience of the president's order, was imprisonment and 
a perpetual exclusion from the rights of citizenship. If any alien, ordered 
to depart, should prove, to the satisfaction of the president, that no injury 
to the United States would arise from suffering him to remain, the presi- 
dent might grant him a license to remain for such time as he should deem 
proper, and at such place as he should designate. 

The question was about to be taken on the final passage of the bill, when 
Mr. Livingston addressed the house as follows : — 

Mr. Speaker, 

I esteem it one of the most fortunate occurrences of my life, 
that, after an inevitable absence from my seat in this house, I 
have arrived in time to express my dissent to the passage of this 
bill. It would have been a source of eternal regret, and the 
keenest remorse, if any private affairs, any domestic concerns, 
however interesting, had deprived me of the opportunity I am 
now about to use of stating my objections, and recording my vote 
against an act which I believe to be in direct violation of the con- 
stitution, and marked with every characteristic of the most odious 
despotism. 

On my arrival, I inquired what subject occupied the attention 
of the house ; and being told it was the alien bill, 1 directed the 
printed copy to be brought to me ; but, to my great surprise, seven 
or eight copies of different bills on the same subject were put into 
my hands : among them it was difficult (so strongly were they 
marked by the same family features) to discover the individual 
bill then under discussion. This circumstance gave me a sus- 
picion, that the principles of the measure were erroneous. Truth 
marches directly to its end by a single, undeviating path. Error 
is either undermining in its object, or pursues it through a thousand 
winding ways : the multiplicity of propositions, therefore, to attain 



MR. LIVINGSTON'S SPEECH, &c. 



123 



the same general but doubtful end, led me to suspect, that neither 
the object nor the means, proposed to attain it, were proper or 
necessary. These surmises have been confirmed by a more mi- 
nute examination of the bill. In the construction of statutes, it is 
a received rule to examine what was the state of things when 
they were passed, and what were the evils they were intended to 
remedy : as these circumstances will be applied in the construction 
of the law, it may be well to examine them minutely in framing 
it. The state of things, if we are to judge from the complexion 
of the bill, must be that a number of aliens, enjoying the protec- 
tion of our government, are plotting its destruction ; that they are 
engaged in treasonable machinations against a people who have 
given them an asylum and support, and that there exists no pro- 
vision for their expulsion and punishment. If these things are so, 
and no remedy exists for the evil, one ought speedily to be provi- 
ded ; but even then it must be a remedy that is consistent with the 
constitution under which we act ; for, by that instrument, all pow- 
ers, not expressly given to it by the union, are reserved to the 
states : it follows, that, unless an express authority can be found, 
vesting us with the power, be the evil ever so great, it can only be 
remedied by the several states, who have never delegated the 
authority to congress. 

We must legislate upon facts, not on surmises : we must have 
evidence, not vague suspicions, if we mean to legislate with pru- 
dence. What facts have been produced ? What evidence has 
been submitted to the house ? I have heard, sir, of none ; but if 
evidence of facts could not be procured, at least it might have 
been expected, that reasonable cause of suspicion should be shown. 
Here, again, gentlemen are at fault ; they cannot even show a sus- 
picion w r hy aliens ought to be suspected. We have, indeed, been 
told, that the fate of Venice, Switzerland, and Batavia, was pro- 
duced by the interference of foreigners. But the instances are 
unfortunate ; because all those powers have been overcome by 
foreign force, or divided by domestic faction, not by the influence 
of aliens who resided among them ; and if any instruction is to be 
gained from the history of those republics, i.t is, that we ought to 
banish not aliens, but all those citizens who do not approve the 
executive acts. This doctrine, 1 believe, gentlemen are not ready 
to avow ; but if this measure prevails, I shall not think the other 
remote. If it has been proved, that these governments were de- 
stroyed by the conspiracies of aliens, it yet remains to be shown, 
that we are in the same situation ; or that any such plots have 
been detected, or are even reasonably suspected here. Nothing 
of this kind has yet been done. A modern Theseus, indeed, has 
told us, that he has procured a clew that will enable him to pene- 
trate the labyrinth and destroy this monster of sedition. Who the 



124 



MR. LIVINGSTON'S SPEECH 



fair Ariadne is, who kindly gave him the ball, he has not revealed ; 
nor, though several days have elapsed since he undertook the ad- 
venture, has he yet told us where the monster lurks. No evi- 
dence then being produced, we have a right to say, that none ex- 
ists. ; and yet we are about to sanction a most important act, and on 
what grounds ? — Our individual suspicions, our private fears, our 
overheated imaginations. Seeing nothing to excite these suspi- 
cions, and not feeling those fears, I cannot give my assent to the 
bill, even if I did not feel a superior obligation to reject it on other 
grounds. 

The first section provides, that it shall be lawful for the presi- 
dent " to order all such aliens as he shall judge dangerous to the 
peace and safety of the United States, or shall have reasonable 
grounds to suspect are concerned in any treasonable or secret 
machinations against the government thereof, to depart out of the 
United States, in such time as shall be expressed in such order." 

Our government, sir, is founded on the establishment of those 
principles which constitute the difference between a free constitu- 
tion and a despotic power ; a distribution of the legislative, execu- 
tive and judiciary powers into several hands ; a distribution strong- 
ly marked in the three first and great divisions of the constitution. 
By the first, all legislative power is given to congress ; the second 
vests all executive functions in the president, and the third de- 
clares, that the judiciary powers shall be exercised by the supreme 
and inferior courts. Here, then, is a division of the governmental 
powers strongly marked, decisively pronounced ; and every act of 
one or all of the branches, that tends to confound these powers, or 
alter their arrangement, must be destructive of the constitution. 
Examine, then, sir, the bill on your table, and declare, whether the 
few lines I have repeated from the first section do not confound 
these fundamental powers of government, vest them all, in more 
unqualified terms, in one hand, and thus subvert the basis on which 
our liberties rest. 

Legislative power prescribes the rule of action ; the judiciary 
applies the general rule to particular cases ; and it is the province of 
the executive to see fhat the laws are carried into full effect. In 
all free governments, these powers are exercised by different men, 
and their union in the same hand is the peculiar characteristic of 
despotism. If the same power that makes the law can construe 
it to suit his interest, and apply it to gratify his vengeance ; if he 
can go further, and execute, according to his own passions, the 
judgment which he himself has pronounced upon his own construc- 
tor of laws which he alone has made, what other features are 
wanted to complete the picture of tyranny ? Yet all this, and 
more, is proposed to be done by this act : by it the president 
ahne is empowered to make the law, to fix in his mind what acts, 



ON THE ALIEN BILL. 



125 



what words, thoughts or looks, shall constitute the crime contem- 
plated by the bill. He is not only authorized to make this law for 
his own conduct, but to vary it at pleasure, as every gust of pas- 
sion, every cloud of suspicion, shall agitate or darken his mind. 
The same power that formed the law then applies it to the guilty 
or innocent victim, whom its own suspicions, or the secret whisper 
of a spy, have designated as its object. The president, then, hav- 
ing construed and applied it, the same president is by the bill 
authorized to execute his sentence, in case of disobedience, by im- 
prisonment during his pleasure. This, then, comes completely 
within the definition of despotism — a union of legislative, execu- 
tive, and judicial powers. But this bill, sir, does not stop here : 
its provisions are a refinement upon despotism, and present an 
image of the most fearful tyranny. Even in despotisms, though 
the monarch legislates, judges and executes, yet he legislates 
openly : his laws, though oppressive, are known : they precede 
the offence, and every man who chooses may avoid the pen- 
alties of disobedience. Yet he judges and executes by proxy, 
and his private interests or passions do not inflame the mind of his 
deputy. 

But here the law is so closely concealed in the same mind that 
gave it birth — the crime is " exciting the suspicions of the presi- 
dent " — that no man can tell what conduct will avoid that suspi- 
cion : a careless word, perhaps misrepresented or never spoken, may 
be sufficient evidence ; a look may destroy ; an idle gesture may en- 
sure punishment ; no innocence can protect, no circumspection can 
avoid the jealousy of suspicion. Surrounded by spies, informers, and 
all that infamous herd which fatten under laws like this, the unfortu- 
nate stranger will never know either of the law of accusation or of the 
judgment, until the moment it is put in execution : he will detest your 
tyranny, and fly from a land of delators, inquisitors, and spies. This, 
sir, is a refinement upon the detestable contrivance of the decem- 
virs. They hung the tables of their laws so high, that few could 
read them ; a tall man, however, might reach — a short one might 
climb and learn their contents ; but here the law is equally inac- 
cessible to high and low, safely concealed in the breast of its 
author ; no industry or caution can penetrate this recess, and attain 
a knowledge of its provisions, nor, even if they could, as the rule 
is not permanent, would it at all avail. 

Having shown, that this bill is at war with the fundamental 
principles of our government, I might stop here in the certain hope 
of its rejection. But I can do more ; unless we are resolved to 
pervert the meaning of terms, I can show that the constitution has 
endeavored to " make its surety doubly sure, and take a bond of 
fate," by several express prohibitions of measures like the one yoi 
11 * 



126 



MR. LIVINGSTON'S SPEECH 



now contemplate. One of these is contained in the ninth section 
of the first article ; it is at the head of the articles which restrict 
the powers of congress, and declares, " that the emigration or im- 
portation of snch persons as any of the states shall think proper to 
admit, shall not be prohibited prior to the year 1808." Now, sir, 
where is the difference between a power to prevent the arrival of 
aliens and a power to send them away as soon as they arrive ? 
To me they appear precisely the same. The constitution ex- 
pressly says, that congress shall not do this ; and yet congress are 
about to delegate this prohibited power, and say the president may x 
exercise it as his pleasure may direct. 

Judiciary power is taken from courts, and given to the executive : 
the previous safeguard of a presentment by a grand inquest is re- 
moved : the trial by jury is abolished : the " public trial," required 
by the constitution, is changed into a secret and worse than in- 
quisitorial tribunal. Instead of giving " information on the nature 
and cause of the accusation," the criminal, alike ignorant of his 
offence, and the danger to which he is exposed, never hears of 
either, until the judgment is passed and the sentence is executed. 
Instead of being " confronted with his accusers," he is kept alike 
ignorant of their names and their existence ; and the forms of a 
trial being dispensed with, it would be a mockery to talk of " pro- 
cess for witness," or the " assistance of counsel for defence." 
Thus are all the barriers, which the wisdom and humanity of our 
country has placed between accused innocence and oppresive pow- 
er, at once forced and broken down. Not a vestige even of their 
form remains. No indictments, no jury, no trial, no public pro- 
cedure, no statement of the accusation, no examination of the 
witnesses in its support, no counsel for defence ; all is darkness, 
silence, mystery and suspicion. But, as if this were not enough, 
the unfortunate victims of this law are told, in the next section, 
that, if they can convince the president that his suspicions are un- 
founded, he may, if he pleases, give them a license to stay. But 
how can they remove his suspicions, when they know not on what 
act they were founded ? How take proof to convince him, when 
he is not bound to furnish that on which he proceeds ? Miserable 
mockery of justice ! Appoint an arbitrary judge, armed with le- 
gislative and executive powers added to his own ! Let him con- 
demn the unheard, the unaccused object of his suspicions, and 
then, to cover the injustice of the scene, gravel)'' tell him, you 
ought not to complain ; you need only disprove facts you have never 
heard, remove suspicions that have never been communicated to you : 
it will be easy to convince your judge, whom you shall not approach, 
that he is tyrannical and unjust ; and when you have done this, we 
give him the power he had before to pardon you if he pleases ! 



ON THE ALIEN BILL. 



127 



So obviously do the constitutional objections present themselves, 
that their existence cannot be denied, and two wretched subter- 
fuges are resorted to, to remove them out of sight. In the first 
place, it is said, the bill does not contemplate the punishment of 
any crime, and therefore the provisions in the constitution, relative 
to criminal proceedings and judiciary powers, do not apply. But 
have the gentlemen, who reason thus, read the bill, or is every 
thing forgotten, in our zealous hurry to pass it? What are the 
offences upon which it is to operate? Not only the offence of 
being " suspected of being dangerous to the peace and safety of 
the United States," but also that of being " concerned in any 
treasonable or secret machinations against the government there- 
of" — and this, we are told, is no crime. A treasonable machina- 
tion against the government is not the subject of criminal juris- 
prudence ! Good heaven ! to what absurdities does not an over- 
zealous attachment to particular measures lead us ! In order to 
punish a particular act, we are forced to say, that treason is no 
crime, and plotting against our government is no offence ! And 
to support this fine hypothesis, we are obliged to plunge deeper 
into absurdity, and say, that the acts, spoken of in the bill are no 
crimes, and therefore the penalty contained in it is not a punish- 
ment, but merely a prevention ; that is to say, we invite strangers 
to come amongst us ; we declare solemnly, that government shall 
not prevent them ; we entice them over by the delusive prospects 
of advantage ; in many parts of the union we permit them to hold 
lands, and give them other advantages while they are waiting for 
the period at which we have promised them a full participa- 
tion of all our rights. An unfortunate stranger, disgusted with 
tyranny at home, thinks he shall find freedom here ; he accepts 
our conditions ; he puts faith in our promises ; he vests his all in 
our hands ; he has dissolved his former connections and made your 
country his own ; but while he is patiently waiting the expiration 
of the period that is to crown the work, entitle him to all the 
rights of a citizen — the tale of a domestic spy, or the calumny of 
a secret enemy, draws on him the suspicions of the president, and, 
unheard, he is ordered to quit the spot he had selected for his re- 
treat, the country which he had chosen for his own, perhaps the 
family which was his only consolation in life ; he is ordered to retire 
to a country whose government, Irritated by his renunciation of its 
authority, will receive only to punish him — and all this, we are 
told, is no punishment ! 

So manifest do these violations of the constitution appear to me, 
so futile the arguments in their defence, that they press seriously 
on my mind, and sink it even to despondency. They are so 
glaring to my understanding, that I have felt it my duty to speak 
of them in a manner that may perhaps give offence to men whom 



123 



MR. LIVINGSTON'S SPEECH 



I esteem, and who seem to think differently on this subject : 
none, however, I can assure them, is intended. I have seen 
measures carried in this house which I thought militated against 
the spirit of the constitution ; but never before have I been wit- 
ness to so open, so undisguised an attack. 

I have now done, sir, with the bill, and come to consider the 
consequences of its operation. One of the most serious has been 
anticipated, when I described the blow it would give to the con- 
stitution of our country. We should cautiously beware of the first 
act of violation : habituated to overleap its bounds, we become 
familiarized to the guilt, and disregard the danger of a second of- 
fence ; until, proceeding from one unauthorized act to another, we 
at length throw off all restraint which our constitution has imposed, 
and very soon not even the semblance of its form will remain. 

But, if regardless of our duty as citizens, and our solemn obli- 
gations as representatives ; regardless of the rights of our constit- 
uents ; regardless of every sanction, human and divine, we are 
ready to violate the constitution we have sworn to defend — will 
the people submit to our unauthorized acts ? will the states sanc- 
tion our usurped power? Sir, they ought not to submit — they 
would deserve the chains which these measures are forging for 
them, if they did not resist. For let no man vainly imagine, that 
the evil is to stop here ; that a few unprotected aliens only are to 
be affected by this inquisitorial power. The same arguments, 
which enforce those provisions against aliens, apply with equal 
strength to enacting them in the case of citizens. The citizen has 
no other protection for his personal security, that I know, against 
laws like this, than the humane provisions I have cited from the 
constitution. But all these apply in common to the citizen and 
the stranger : all crimes are to be tried by jury : no person shall 
be held to answer unless on presentment : in all criminal prosecu- 
tions, the accused is to have a public trial : the accused is to be 
informed of the nature of the charge; to be confronted with the 
witnesses against him ; may have process to enforce the appear- 
ance of those in his favor, and is to be allowed counsel in his de- 
fence. Unless, therefore, we can believe, that treasonable machi- 
nations and the other offences, described in the bill, are not crimes, 
that an alien is not a person, and that one charged with treasona- 
ble practices is not accused — unless we can believe all this in con- 
tradiction to our understanding, to received opinions and the uni- 
form practice of our courts, we must allow, that all these provisions 
extend equally to alien and native, and that the citizen has no 
other security for his personal safety than is extended to the 
stranger, who is within his gates. If, therefore, this security is 
violated in one instance, what pledge have w r e that it will not be 
in the other? The same plea of necessity will justify both. 



ON THE ALIEN BILL, 



129 



Either the offences described in the act are crimes, or they are 
not. If they are, then all the humane provisions of the constitu- 
tion forbid this mode of punishing, or preventing them, equally as 
relates to aliens and citizens. If they are not crimes, the citizen 
has no more safety by the constitution, than the alien ; for all 
these provisions apply only to crimes ; so that, in either event, the 
citizen has the same reason to expect a similar law to the one now 
oefore you, which will subject his person to the uncontrolled des- 
potism of a single man. You have already been told of plots and 
conspiracies ; and all the frightful images, that are necessary to 
keep up the present system of terror and alarm, have been pre- 
sented to you ; but who are implicated by these dark hints — these 
mysterious allusions ? They are our own citizens, sir, not aliens. 
If there is any necessity for the system now proposed, it is more 
necessary to be enforced against our own citizens, than against 
strangers ; and I have no doubt, that either in this or some other 
shape, this will be attempted. I now ask, sir, whether the people 
of America are prepared for this; whether they are willing to 
part with all the means which the wisdom of their ancestors dis- 
covered ; and their own caution so lately adopted to secure their 
own persons; whether they are willing to submit to imprison- 
ment, or exile, whenever suspicion, calumny, or vengeance, shall 
mark them for ruin. Are they base enough to be prepared for 
this ? No, sir, they will, I repeat it, they will resist this tyran- 
nical system ; the people will oppose, the states will not submit to 
its operations ; they ought not to acquiesce, and I pray to God 
they never may. 

My opinions, sir, on this subject, are explicit, and I wish they 
may be known ; they are, that whenever our laws manifestly in- 
fringe the constitution under which they were made, the people 
ought not to hesitate which they should obey : if w 7 e exceed our 
powers, we become tyrants, and our acts have no effect. Thus, 
sir, one of the first effects of measures such as this, if they be 
acquiesced in, will be disaffection among the states, and opposition 
among the people to your government ; tumults, violations, and a 
recurrence to first revolutionary principles : if they are submitted 
to, the consequences will be worse. After such manifest violation 
of the principles of our constitution, the form will not long be sa- 
cred ; presently every vestige of it will be lost and swallowed up 
in the gulf of despotism. But should the evil proceed no farther 
than the execution of the present law, what a fearful picture will 
our country present ! The system of espionage thus established, 
the country will swarm with information-spies, delators, and all 
that odious tribe, that breed in the sunshine of despotic power, 
that suck the blood of the unfortunate, and creep into the bosom 
of sleeping innocence only to awaken it with a burning wound 

R 



130 



MR. LIVINGSTON'S SPEECH 



The hours of the most unsuspecting confidence ; the intimacies of 
friendship, or the recesses of domestic retirement, afford no secu- 
rity : the companion whom you must trust, the friend in whom 
you must confide, the domestic who waits in your chamber, are all 
tempted to betray your imprudence or guardless follies, to misrep- 
resent your words, to convey them, distorted by calumny, to the 
secret tribunal where jealousy presides, where fear officiates as ac- 
cuser, where suspicion is the only evidence that is heard. 

These, bad as they are, are not the only ill consequences of 
these measures. Among them we may reckon the loss of wealth, 
of population and of commerce. Gentlemen who support the 
bill seemed to be aware of this, when j^esterday they introduced 
a clause to secure the property of those who might be ordered to 
go off. They should have foreseen the consequences of the steps 
which they have been taking : it is now too late to discover, that 
large sums are drawn from the banks, that a great capital is taken 
from commerce. It is ridiculous to observe the solicitude they 
show to retain the wealth of these dangerous men, whose persons 
they are so eager to get rid of. If they wish to retain it, it must 
be by giving them security to their persons, and assuring them 
that while they respect the laws, the laws will protect them from 
arbitrary powers ; it must be, in short, by rejecting the bill on 
your table. I might mention other inferior considerations ; but I 
ought, sir, rather to entreat the pardon of the house for having 
touched on this. Compared to the breach of our constitution, 
and the establishment of arbitrary power, every other topic is 
trifling ; arguments of convenience sink into nothing ; the preser- 
vation of wealth, the increase of commerce, however weighty on 
other occasions, here lose their importance, when the fundamental 
principles of freedom are in danger. I am tempted to borrow the 
impressive language of a foreign speaker, and exclaim — " Perish 
our commerce, let our constitution live;" perish our riches, let 
our freedom live. This, sir, would be the sentiment of every 
American, were the alternative between submission and wealth ; 
but here, sir, it is proposed to destroy our wealth in order to ruin 
our commerce ; not in order to preserve our constitution, but to 
break it — not to secure our freedom, but to abandon it. 

I have now done, sir; but, before I sit down, let me entreat 
gentlemen seriously to reflect, before they pronounce the decisive 
vote, that gives the first open stab to the principles of our govern- 
ment. Our mistaken zeal, like the patriarch of old, has bound 
one victim ; it lies at the foot of the altar ; a sacrifice of the first- 
born offspring of freedom is proposed by those who gave it birth. 
The hand is already raised to strike, and nothing, I fear, but the 
voice of Heaven can arrest the impious blow. 

Let not gentlemen flatter themselves, that the fervor of the 



ON THE ALIEN BILL. 



moment can make the people insensible to these aggressions. It 
is an honest, noble warmth, produced by an indignant sense of in- 
jury. It will never, 1 trust, be extinct, while there is a proper 
cause to excite it. But the people of America, sir, though watch- 
ful against foreign aggressions, are not careless of domestic en- 
croachment : they are as jealous, sir, of their liberties at home as 
of the power and prosperity of their country abroad : they will 
awake to a sense of their danger. Do not let us flatter ourselves, 
then, that these measures will be unobserved or disregarded : do 
not let us be told, sir, that we excite a fervor against foreign ag- 
gressions only to establish tyranny at home ; that, like the arch 
traitor, we cry, " Hail Columbia," at the moment we are betraying 
her to destruction ; that we sing out, " Happy land," when we are 
plunging it in ruin and disgrace ; and that we are absurd enough 

l o o o ' o 

to call ourselves "free and enlightened," while we advocate prin- 
ciples that would have disgraced the age of Gothic barbarity, and 
establish a code, compared to which the ordeal is wise, and the 
trial by battel is merciful and just. 



The bill became a law on the 25th June, 1798 



SPEECH OF GOVERNEUR MORRIS, 



ON 

THE JUDICIARY ACT, 

DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 
JANUARY 14, 1802, 

On the following motion, " Resolved, That the act of congress, passed on the 
13th day of February, 1801, entitled J An Act to provide for the more con- 
venient organization of the courts of the United States, ought to be 
repealed." 



Mr. President, 
I had fostered the hope that some gentleman, who thinks with 
me, would have taken upon himself the task of replying to the ob- 
servations made yesterday, and this morning, in favor of the mo- 
tion on your table. But since no gentleman has gone so fully into 
the subject as it seems to require, I am compelled to request your 
attention. 

We were told, yesterday, by the honorable member from Vir- 
ginia, that our objections were calculated for the by-standers, and 
made with a view to produce effect upon the people at large. I 
know not for whom this charge is intended. I certainly recollect 
no such observations. As I was personally charged with making 
a play upon words, it may have been intended for me. But sure- 
ly, sir, it will be recollected that I declined that paltry game, and 
declared that I considered the verbal criticism which had been 
relied on as irrelevant. If I can recollect what I said, from 
recollecting well what I thought and meant to say, sure I am, that 
I uttered nothing in the style of an appeal to the people. I hope 
no member of this house has so poor a sense of its dignity as to 
make such an appeal. As to myself, it is now near thirty years 
since I was called into public office. During that period, I have 
frequently been the servant of the people, always their friend ; 
but at no one moment of my life their flatterer, and God forbid 
that I ever should be. When the honorable gentleman considers 
the course we have taken, he must see, that the observation he 
nas thus pointed can light on no object. I trust that it did not 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH, &c. 



133 



flow from the consciousness of his own intentions. He, I hope, 
had no view of this sort. If he had, he was much, very much 
mistaken. Had. he looked round upon those who honor us with 
their attendance, he would have seen that the splendid flashes of 
his wit excited no approbatory smile. The countenances of 
those by whom we were surrounded presented a different specta- 
cle. They were impressed with the dignity of this house : they 
perceived in it the dignity of the American people, and felt, with 
high and manly sentiment, their own participation. 

We have been told, sir, by the honorable gentleman from Vir- 
ginia, that there is no independent part of this government ; that, 
in popular governments, the force of every department, as well as 
the government itself, must depend upon popular opinion. The 
honorable member from North Carolina has informed us, that there 
is no check for the overbearing powers of the legislature but pub- 
lic opinion ; and he has been pleased to notice a sentiment I had 
uttered — a sentiment which not only fell from my lips, but which 
flowed from my heart. It has, however, been misunderstood and 
misapplied. After reminding the house of the dangers to which 
popular governments are exposed from the influence of designing 
demagogues upon popular passion, I took the liberty to say, that 
we, we the senate of the United States, are assembled here to 
save the people from their most dangerous enemy, to save them 
from themselves ; to guard them against the baneful effects of 
their own precipitation, their passion, their misguided zeal. It is 
for these purposes that all our constitutional checks are devised. 
If this be not the language of the constitution, the constitution is 
all nonsense. For why are the senators chosen by communities, 
and the representatives directly by the people ? Why are the one 
chosen for a longer term than the other ? Why give one branch 
of the legislature a negative upon the acts of the other ? Why 
give the president a right to arrest the proceedings of both, till 
two thirds of each should concur ? Why all these multiplied pre- 
cautions, unless to check and control that impetuous spirit, that 
headlong torrent of opinion, which has swept away every popular 
government that ever existed. 

With the most respectful attention, I heard the declaration of 
the gentleman from Virginia, of his own sentiment. " Whatever," 
said he, " may be my opinion of the constitution, I hold myself 
bound to respect it." He disdained, sir, to profess an attachment 
he did not feel, and I accept his candor as a pledge for the per- 
formance of his duty. But he will admit this necessary inference 
from that frank confession, that, although he will struggle (against 
his inclination) to support the constitution, even to the last mo- 
ment, yet when, in spite of all his efforts, it shall fall, he will re 
joice in its destruction. Far different are my feelings. It is pos 
12 



134 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH 



sible that we are both prejudiced, and that, in taking the ground 
on which we respectively stand, our judgments are influenced by 
the sentiments which glow in our hearts. I, sir, wish to support 
this constitution, because I love it ; and I love it because I consid- 
er it as the bond of our union ; because in my soul I believe, that 
on it depends our harmony and our peace ; that without it, we 
should soon be plunged in all the horrors of civil war; that this 
country would be deluged with the blood of its inhabitants, and a 
brother's hand raised against the bosom of a brother. 

After these preliminary remarks, I hope I shall be indulged 
while I consider the subject in reference to the two points which 
have been taken, the expediency and the constitutionality of the 
repeal. 

In considering the expediency, I hope I shall be pardoned for 
asking your attention to some parts of the constitution which have 
not yet been dwelt upon, and which tend to elucidate this part of 
our inquiry. I agree fully with the gentleman, that every section, 
every sentence, and every word of the constitution, ought to be 
deliberately weighed and examined ; nay, I am content to go along 
with him, and give its due value and importance to every stop and 
comma. In the beginning, we find a declaration of the motives 
which induced the American people to bind themselves by this 
compact. And in the foreground of that declaration, we find 
these objects specified ; " to form a more perfect union, to estab- 
lish justice, and to ensure domestic tranquillity." But how are 
these objects effected ? The people intended to establish justice. 
What provision have they made to fulfil that intention ? After 
pointing out the courts, which should be established, the second 
section of the third article informs us, " the judicial power shall 
extend to all cases in law and equity, arising under this constitu- 
tion, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which 
shall be made, under their authority ; to all cases affecting ambas- 
sadors, other public ministers and consuls ; to all cases of admiral- 
ty and maritime jurisdiction ; to controversies to which the Uni- 
ted States shall be a party ; to controversies between two or more 
states : between a state and citizens of another state ; between 
citizens of different states ;. between citizens of the same state 
claiming lands under grants of different states ; and between a 
state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or 
subjects. 

" In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and 
consuls, and those in which a state shall be a party, the supreme 
court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before 
mentioned, the supreme court shall have appellate jurisdiction, 
both as to law and fact, with such exceptions and under such reg- 
ulations as the congress shall make." 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



135 



Thus, then, we find that the judicial power shall extend to a 
great variety of cases, but that the supreme court shall have only 
appellate jurisdiction in all admiralty and maritime causes, in all 
controversies between the United States and private citizens, be- 
tween citizens of different states, between citizens of the same 
state claiming lands under different states, and between a citizen 
of the United States and foreign states, citizens or subjects. The 
honorable gentleman from Kentucky, who made the motion on 
your table, has told us that the constitution, in its judiciary pro- 
visions, contemplated only those cases which could not be tried in 
the state courts. But he will, I hope, pardon me wdien I contend 
that the constitution did not merely contemplate, but did by ex- 
press words, reserve to the national tribunals a right to decide, and 
did secure to the citizens of America a right to demand their de- 
cision, in many cases evidently cognizable in the state courts. 
And what are these cases? They are those, in respect to which, 
it is by the constitution presumed, that the state courts would not 
always make a cool and calm investigation, a fair and just decision. 
To form, therefore, a more perfect union, and to insure domestic 
tranquillity, the constitution has said there shall be courts of the 
union to try causes, by the wrongful decision of which, the union 
might be endangered or domestic tranquillity be disturbed. And 
what courts ? Look again at the cases designated. The supreme 
court has no original jurisdiction. The constitution has said that 
the judicial powers shall be vested in the supreme and inferior 
courts. It has declared that the judicial power, so vested, shall 
extend to the cases mentioned, and that the supreme court shall 
not have original jurisdiction in those cases. Evidently, therefore, 
it has declared, that they shall (in the first instance) be tried by 
inferior courts, with appeal to the supreme court. This, therefore, 
amounts to a declaration that the inferior courts shall exist : since, 
without them, the citizen is deprived of those rights for which he 
stipulated, or rather those rights verbally granted, would be actu- * 
ally withheld, and that great security of our union, that necessary 
guard of our tranquillity, be completely paralyzed, if not destroy- 
ed. In declaring, then, that these tribunals shall exist, it equally 
declares, that the congress shall ordain and establish them. I say 
they shall ; this is the evident intention, if not the express words, 
of the constitution. The convention in framing, the American 
people in adopting that compact, did not, could not presume, that 
the congress would omit to do what they were thus bound to do. 
They could not presume, that the legislature would hesitate one 
moment, in establishing the organs necessary to carry into effect 
those wholesome, those important provisions. 

The honorable member from Virginia has given us a history of 
the judicial system, and, in the course of it, has told us, that the 



136 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH 



judges of the supreme court knew, when they accepted their of- 
fices, the duties they had to perform, and the salaries they were to 
receive. He thence infers, that if again called on to do the same 
duties, they have no right to complain. Agreed — but that is not 
the question between us. Admitting that they have made a hard 
bargain, and that we may hold them to a strict performance, is it 
wise to exact their compliance to the injury of our constituents ? 
We are urged to go back to the old system ; but let us first exam- 
ine the effects of that system. The judges of the supreme 
court rode the circuits, and two of them, with the assistance of a 
district judge, held circuit courts and tried causes. As a supreme 
court, they have in most cases only an appellate jurisdiction. In 
the first instance, therefore, they tried a cause, sitting as an inferior 
court, and then, on appeal, tried it over again, as a supreme court. 
Thus, then, the appeal was from the sentence of the judges to the 
judges themselves. But say, that to avoid this impropriety, you 
will incapacitate the two judges who sat on the circuit from sitting in 
the supreme court to review their own decrees. Strike them off; 
and suppose either the same or a contrary decision to have been 
made on another circuit, by two of their brethren in a similar case: 
for the same reason you strike them off, and then you have no 
court left. Is this wise ? Is it safe ? You place yourselves in 
the situation where your citizens must be deprived of the advan- 
tage given to them of a court of appeals, or else run the greatest 
risk that the decision of the first court will carry with it that of the 
other. 

The same honorable member has given us a history of the law 
passed the last session, which he wishes now to repeal. That his- 
tory is accurate, at least in one important part of it. I believe that 
all amendments were rejected, pertinaciously rejected ; and I ac- 
Knowledge that I joined heartily in that rejection. It was for the 
clearest reason on earth. We all perfectly understood, that to 
1 amend the bill was to destroy it ; that if ever it got back to the 
other house, it would perish. Those, therefore, who approved ot 
the general provisions of that bill, were determined to adopt it. 
We sought the practicable good, and would not, in pursuit of unat- 
tainable perfection, sacrifice that good to the pride of opinion. 
We took the bill, therefore, with its imperfections, convinced, that 
when it was once passed into a law, it might be easily amended. 

We are now told, that this procedure was improper ; nay, that it 
was indecent ; that public opinion had declared itself against us ; that 
a majority (holding different opinions) was already chosen to the other 
house ; and that a similar majority was expected for that in which 
we sit. Mr. President, are we then to understand, that opposition to 
the majority in the two houses of congress is improper — is indecent fV 
If so, what are we to think of those gentlemen, who, not only 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



137 



with proper and decent, but with laudable motives (for such is 
their claim), so long, so perseveringly, so pertinaciously opposed 
that voice of the people, which had so repeatedly, and for so 
many years, declared itself against them, through the organ of 
their representatives ? Was this indecent in them ? If not. how 
could it be improper for us to seize the only moment, which was 
left for the then majority to do what they deemed a necessary act? 
Let me again refer to those imperious demands of the constitu- 
tion, which called on us to establish inferior courts. Let me re- 
mind gentlemen of their assertion on this floor, that centuries 
might elapse before any judicial system could be established with 
general consent. And then let me ask, being thus impressed with 
the sense of the duty and the difficulty of performing that arduous 
task, Was it not wise to seize the auspicious moment ? 

Among the many stigmas affixed to this law, we have been told 
that the president, in selecting men to fill the offices which it cre- 
ated, made vacancies and tilled them from the floor of this house ; 
and that but for the influence of this circumstance, a majority in 
favor of it could not have been found. Let us examine this sug- 
gestion. It is grounded on a supposition of corrupt influence, de- 
rived from a hope founded on two remote and successive contin- 
gencies. First, the vacancy might or might not exist ; for it de- 
pended as well on the acceptance of another as on the president's 
grant : and secondly, the president might or might not fill it with 
a member of this house. Yet on this vague conjecture, on this 
unstable ground, it is inferred, that men in high confidence violated 
their duty. It is hard to determine the influence of self-interest 
on the heart of man. I shall not, therefore, make the attempt. 
In the present case, it is possible that the imputation may be just, 
but I hope not, I believe not. At any rate, gentlemen will agree 
with me, that the calculation is uncertain, and the conjecture 
vague. 

But let it now, for argument's sake, be admitted, saving always* 
the reputation of honorable men, who are not here to defend them- 
selves — let it, I say, for argument's sake, be admitted, that the 
gentlemen alluded to acted under the influence of improper mo- 
tives. What then ? Is a law that has received the varied assent 
required by the constitution, and is clothed with all the needful for- 
malities, thereby invalidated ? Can you impair its force by im 
peaching the motives of any member who voted for it ? Does it 
follow, that a law is bad because all those who concurred in it can- 
not give good reasons for their votes ? Is it not before us ? Must 
we not judge of it by its intrinsic merit ? Is it a fair argument, 
addressed to our understanding, to say, we must repeal a law, even 
a good one, if the enacting of it may have been effected, in anv 
12 * S 



138 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH 



degree, by improper motives ? Or, is the judgment of this house 
so feeble that it may not be trusted ? 

Gentlemen tell us, however, that the law is materially defective, 
nay, that it is unconstitutional. What follows ? Gentlemen bid 
us repeal it. But is this just reasoning ? If the law be only de- 
fective, why not amend ? And if unconstitutional, why repeal ? 
In this case, no repeal can be necessary ; the law is in itself void ; 
it is a mere dead letter. 

To show that it is unconstitutional, a particular clause is pointed 
out, and an inference is made, as in the case of goods,, where, be- 
cause there is one contraband article on board, the whole cargo is 
forfeited. Admit, for a moment, that the part alluded to were un- 
constitutional, this would in no wise affect the remainder. That 
part would be void, or, if you think proper, you can repeal that 
part. 

Let us, however, examine the clause objected to on the ground 
of the constitution. It is said, that by this law the district judges 
in Tennessee and Kentucky are removed from office by making 
them circuit judges. And again, that you have by law appointed 
two new offices, those of circuit judges, and filled them by law, 
instead of pursuing the modes of appointment prescribed by the 
constitution. To prove all this, the gentleman from Virginia did 
us the favor to read those parts of the law which he condemns ; 
and if I can trust to my memory, it is clear, from what he read, 
that the law does not remove these district judges, neither does it 
appoint them to the office of circuit judges. It does, indeed, put 
down the district courts ; but is so far from destroying the offices 
of district judge, that it declares, the persons filling those offices 
shall perform the duty of holding the circuit courts. And so far 
is it from appointing circuit judges, that it declares, the circuit 
courts shall be held by the district judges. But gentlemen con- 
tend, that to discontinue the district courts, was in effect to remove 
the district judge. This, sir, is so far from being a just inference 
from the law, that the direct contrary follows as a necessary result ; 
for it is on the principle, that these judges continue in office after 
their courts are discontinued, that the new duty of holding courts 
is assigned to them. But gentlemen say, this doctrine militates 
with the principles we contend for. Surely not. It must be recol- 
lected, sir, that we have repeatedly admitted the right of the legis- 
lature to change, alter, modify and amend the judiciary system, so 
as best to promote the interest of the people. We only contend, 
that you shall not exceed or contravene the authority by which 
you act. But, say gentlemen, you forced this new office on tho 
district judges, and this is in effect a new appointment. I answer, 
ihat the question car only arise on the refusal of those judges to 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



139 



act. But is it unconstitutional to assign new duties to officen al 
ready existing ? I fear that if this construction be adopted, our 
labors will speedily end ; for we shall be so shackled, that we can- 
not move. What is the practice ? Do we not every day call 
upon particular officers to perform duties not previously assigned to 
or required of them ? And must the executive, in every such 
case, make a new appointment ? 

But as a further reason to restore, by repealing this law, the old 
system, an honorable member from North Carolina has told us, the 
judges of the supreme court should attend in the states to acquire 
a competent knowledge of local institutions, and for this purpose 
should continue to ride the circuits. I believe there is great use 
in sending young men to travel ; it tends to enlarge their views, 
and give them more liberal ideas than they might otherwise pos- 
sess. Nay, if they reside long enough in foreign countries, they 
may become acquainted with the manners of the people, and ac- 
quire some knowledge of their civil institutions. But I am not 
quite convinced, that riding rapidly from one end of this country 
to the other, is the best way to study law. I am inclined to be- 
lieve, that knowledge may be more conveniently acquired in the 
closet than in the high road. It is moreover to be presumed, that 
the first magistrate would, in selecting persons to fill these offices, 
take the best characters from the different parts of the country, 
who already possess the needful acquirements. But admitting 
that the president should not duly exercise, in this respect, his dis- 
cretionary powers, and admitting that the ideas of the gentleman 
are correct, how wretched must be our condition ! These, our 
judges, when called on to exercise their functions, would but begin 
to learn their trade, and that too at a period of life when the intel- 
lectual powers, with no great facility, can acquire new ideas. We 
must, therefore, have a double set of judges — one set of appren- 
tice-judges to ride circuits and learn ; the other set of master-judges 
to hold courts and decide controversies. 

We are told, sir, that the repeal asked for is important, in that 
it may establish a precedent, for that it is not merely a question on 
the propriety of disbanding a corps of sixteen rank and file ; but 
that provision may hereafter be made, not for sixteen, but for six- 
teen hundred, or sixteen thousand judges, and that it may become 
necessary to turn them to the right about. Mr. President, I will 
not, I cannot presume, that any such provision will ever be made, 
and therefore I cannot conceive any such necessity; I will not 
suppose, for I cannot suppose, that any party or faction will ever 
do any thing so wild, so extravagant. But I will ask, How does 
this strange supposition consist with the doctrine of gentlemen that 
public opinion is a sufficient check on the legislature, and a suf- 
ficient safeguard to the people ? Put the case to its consequences, 



140 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH 



and what becomes of the check ? Will gentlemen say it is to be 
found in the force of this wise precedent ? Is this to control suc- 
ceeding rulers in their wild, their mad career? But how ? Is the 
creation of judicial officers the only thing committed to their dis- 
cretion ? Have they not, according to the doctrine contended for, 
our all at their disposal, with no other check than public opinion, 
which, according to the supposition, will not prevent them from 
committing the greatest follies and absurdities? Take then all the 
gentleman's ideas and compare them together ; it will result that 
here is an inestimable treasure put into the hands of drunkards, 
madmen and fools. 

But away with all these derogatory, suppositions. The legisla- 
ture may be trusted. Our government is a system of salutary 
checks : one legislative branch is a check on the other. And 
should the violence of party spirit bear both of them away, the 
president, an officer high in honor, high in the public confidence, 
charged with weighty concerns, responsible to his own reputation 
and to the world, stands ready to arrest their too impetuous course. 
This is our system. It makes no mad appeal to every mob in the 
country. It appeals to the sober sense of men selected from their 
fellow-citizens for their talents, for their virtue ; of men advanced 
in life, and of matured judgment. It appeals to their understand- 
ing, to their integrity, to their honor, to their love of fame, to their 
sense of shame. If all these checks should prove insufficient, and 
alas ! such is the condition of human nature, that I fear they will 
not always be sufficient, the constitution has given us one more : 
it has given us an independent judiciary. We have been told, 
that the executive authority carries your laws into execution. But 
let us not be the dupes of sound. The executive magistrate com- 
mands, indeed, your fleets and armies ; and duties, imposts, ex- 
cises, and other taxes are collected, and all expenditures are made 
by officers whom he has appointed. So far, indeed, he executes 
your laws. But these, his acts, apply not often to individual con- 
cerns. In those cases, so important to the peace and happiness 
of society, the execution of your laws is confided to your judges ; 
and therefore are they rendered independent. Before, then, that 
you violate that independence — pause. There are state sove- 
reignties as well as the sovereignty of the general government. 
There are cases, too many cases, in which the interest of one is 
not considered as the interest of the other. Should these conflict, 
if the judiciary be gone, the question is no longer of law, but of 
force. This is a state of things which no honest and wise man can 
view without horror. 

Suppose, in the omnipotence of your legislative authority, you 
trench upon the rights of your fellow-citizens by passing an un- 
constitutional law : if the judiciary department preserve its vigor, 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



141 



it will stop you short : instead of a resort to arms, there will be a 
happier appeal to argument. Suppose a case still more impres- 
sive. The president is at the head of your armies. Let one of 
his generals, flushed with victory, and proud in command, presume 
to trample on the rights of your most insignificant citizen : indig- 
nant of the wrong, he will demand the protection of your tribunals, 
and. safe in the shadow of their wings, will laugh his oppressor 
to scorn. 

Having now, I believe, examined all the arguments adduced to 
show the expediency of this motion, and which, fairly sifted, reduce 
themselves at last to these two things — restore the ancient system 
and save the additional expense ; — before I close what I have to 
say on this ground, I hope I shall be pardoned for saying one or 
two words about the expense. I hope, also, that notwithstanding 
the epithets which may be applied to my arithmetic, I shall be 
pardoned for using that which 1 learned at school. It may have 
deceived me when it taught me that two and two make four : but 
though it should now be branded with opprobrious terms, I must 
still believe that two and two do still make four. Gentlemen of 
newer theories, and of higher attainments, while they smile at 
my inferiority, must bear with my infirmities, and take me as I am. 

In all this great system of saving, in all this ostentatious econ- 
omy, this rage of reform, how happens it that the eagle eye has 
not yet been turned to the mint? That no one piercing glance 
has been able to behold the expenditures of that department ? 1 
am far from wishing to overturn it. Though it be not of great 
necessity, nor even of substantial importance ; though it be but a 
splendid trapping of your government ; yet, as it may, by im- 
pressing on your current coin the emblems of your sovereignty, 
have some tendency to encourage a national spirit, and to foster 
the national pride, I am willing to contribute my share for its sup- 
port. Yes, sir, I would foster the national pride. I cannot indeed 
approve of national vanity, nor feed it with vile adulation. But I 
would gladly cherish the lofty sentiments of national pride. I 
would wish my countrymen to feel like Romans, to be as proud as 
Englishmen ; and, going still farther, I would wish them to veil 
their pride in the well-bred modesty of French politeness. But 
can this establishment, the mere decoration of your political edi- 
fice, can it be compared with the massy columns on which rest 
your peace and safety ? Shall the striking of a few half pence be 
put into a parallel with the distribution of justice ? I find, sir, from 
the estimates on your table, that the salaries of the officers of the 
mint amount to ten thousand six hundred dollars, and that the ex- 
penses are estimated at ten thousand nine hundred ; making twen 
ty-one thousand five hundred dollars. 

I find that the actual expendituies of the last year, exclusive oi 



142 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH 



salaries, amounted to twenty-five thousand one hundred and fifty- 
four dollars ; add the salaries, ten thousand six hundred dollars, 
we have a total of thirty-five thousand seven hundred and fifty- 
four dollars ; a sum which exceeds the salary of these sixteen 
judges. 

I find further, that during the last year, they have coined cents 
and half cents to the amount of ten thousand four hundred seven- 
ty-three dollars and twenty-nine cents. Thus their copper coin 
age falls a little short of what it costs us for their salaries. We 
have, however, from this establishment, about a million of cents ; 
one to each family in America ; a little emblematical medal, to be 
hung over their chimney-pieces ; and this is all their compensation 
for all that expense. Yet not a word has been said about the 
mint ; while the judges, whose services are so much greater, and 
of so much more importance to the community, are to be struck 
off at a blow, in order to save an expense which, compared with 
the object, is pitiful. What conclusion, then, are we to draw from 
this predilection ? 

I will not pretend to assign to gentlemen the motives by which 
they may be influenced ; but if I should permit myself to make 
the inquiry, the style of many observations, and more especially 
the manner, the warmth, the irritability, which have been exhib- 
ited on this occasion, would lead to a solution of the problem. I 
had the honor, sir, when I addressed you the other day, to ob- 
serve, that I believed the universe could not afford a spectacle 
more sublime than the view of a powerful state kneeling at the 
altar of justice, and sacrificing there her passion and her pride ; 
that I once fostered the hope of beholding that spectacle of mag- 
nanimity in America. And now what a world of figures has the 
gentleman from Virginia formed on his misapprehension of that 
remark. I never expressed any thing like exultation at the idea 
of a state ignomiriiously dragged in triumph at the heels of your 
judges. But permit me to say, the gentleman's exquisite sensi- 
bility on that subject, his alarm and apprehension, all show his 
strong attachment to state authority. Far be it from me, how- 
ever, to charge the gentleman With improper motives. I know 
that his emotions arise from one of those imperfections in otir na- 
ture, which we cannot remedy. They are excited by causes 
which have naturally made him hostile to this constitution, 
though his duty compels him reluctantly to support it. I hope, 
however, that those gentlemen who entertain different sentiments, 
and who are less irritable on the score of state dignity, will think 
it essential to preserve a constitution, without which, the inde- 
pendent existence of the states themselves will be but of short 
duration. 

This, sir, leads me to the second object I had proposed. I 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



143 



shall, therefore, pray your indulgence, while I consider how far 
this measure is constitutional. I have not been able to discover 
the expediency, but will now, for argument's sake, admit it ; and 
here, 1 cannot but express my deep regret for the situation of an 
honorable member from North Carolina. Tied fast as he is, by 
his instructions, arguments, however forcible, can never be ef- 
fectual. I ought, therefore, to wish, for his sake, that his mind 
may not be convinced by any thing 1 shall say ; for hard indeed 
would be his condition, to be bound by the contrariant obligations 
of an order and an oath. I cannot, however, but express my pro- 
found respect for the talents of those who gave him his instruc- 
tions, and who, sitting at a distance, without hearing the argu- 
ments, could better understand the subject than their senator on 
this floor, after full discussion. 

The honorable member from Virginia has repeated the dis- 
tinction, before taken, between the supreme and the inferior tribu- 
nals ; he has insisted on the distinction between the words shall 
and may ; has inferred from that distinction, that the judges of the 
inferior courts are subjects of legislative discretion ; and has con- 
tended that the word may includes all power respecting the subject 
to which it is applied, consequently to raise up and to put down, 
to create and to destroy. I must entreat your patience, sir, while 
I go more into this subject than I ever supposed would be neces- 
sary. By the article, so often quoted, it is declared, " that the 
judicial power of the United States shall be vested in one su- 
preme court, and in such inferior courts as the congress may from 
time to time establish." I beg leave to recall your attention to 
what I have already said of these inferior courts. That the original 
jurisdiction of various subjects being given exclusively to them, it 
became the bounden duty of congress to establish such courts. I 
will not repeat the argument already used on that subject. But I 
will ask those, who urge the distinction between the supreme 
court and the inferior tribunals, whether a law was not previously 
necessary before the supreme court could be organized. They 
reply, that the constitution says, there shall be a supreme court, 
and therefore the congress are commanded to organize it, while 
the rest is left to their discretion. This, sir, is not the fact. The 
constitution says, the judicial power shall be vested in one supreme 
court, and in inferior courts. The legislature can, therefore, only 
organize one supreme court ; but they may establish as many infe- 
rior courts as they shall think proper. The designation made of 
them by the constitution is, such inferior courts as the congress 
may from time to time ordain and establish. But why, say gen- 
tlemen, fix precisely one supreme court, and leave the rest to 
legislative discretion ? The answer is simple : it results from the 
nature of things, from the existent and probable state of our coun 



144 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH 



try. There was no difficulty in deciding that one and only one 
supreme court would be proper or necessary, to which should lie 
appeals from inferior tribunals. Not so as to these. The United 
States were advancing in rapid progression. Their population of 
three millions was soon to become five, then ten, afterwards twen- 
ty millions. This was well known, as far as the future can be- 
come an object of human comprehension. In this increase of 
numbers, with a still greater increase of wealth, with the extension 
of our commerce and the progress of the arts, it was evident, that 
although a great many tribunals would become necessary, it was 
impossible to determine either on the precise number or the most 
convenient form. The convention did not pretend to this presci- 
ence ; but had they possessed it, would it have been proper to 
have established then all the tribunals necessary for all future 
times ? Would it have been wise to have planted courts among 
the Chickasaws, the Choctaws, the Cherokees, the Tuscaroras, 
and God knows how many more, because at some future day the 
regions over which they roam might be cultivated by polished 
men ? W as it not proper, w T ise and necessary, to leave in the dis- 
cretion of congress the number and the kind of courts which they 
might find it proper to establish for the purpose designated by the 
constitution ? This simple statement of facts, facts of public noto- 
riety, is alone a sufficient comment on, and explication of, the 
word on which gentlemen have so much relied. The convention 
in framing, the people in adopting, this compact, say the judicial 
pow r er shall extend to many cases, the original cognizance where- 
of shall be by the inferior courts ; but it is neither necessary, nor 
even possible, now to determine their number or their form : that 
essential power, therefore, shall vest in such inferior courts as the 
congress may, from time to time, in the progression of time and 
according to the indication of circumstances, establish ; not pro- 
vide, or determine, but establish. Not a mere temporary provis- 
ion, but an establishment. If, after this, it had said in general 
terms, that judges should hold their offices during good behavior, 
could a doubt have existed on the interpretation of this act, under 
all its attending circumstances, that the judges of the inferior 
courts were intended, as well as those of the supreme court ? But 
did the framers of the constitution stop there ? Is there then 
nothing more ? Did they risk on these grammatical niceties the 
fate of America ? Did they rest here the most important branch 
of our government? Little important, indeed, as to foreign dan- 
ger, but infinitely valuable to our domestic peace, and to personal 
protection against the oppression of our rulers. No ; lest a doubt 
should be raised, they have carefully connected the judges of both 
courts in the same sentence ; they have said " the judges both of 
the supreme and inferior courts," thus coupling them inseparably 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



145 



together. You may cut the bands, but you can never untie them. 
With salutary caution they devised this clause to arrest the over- 
bearing temper which they knew belonged to legislative bodies. 
They do not say the judges simply, but the judges of the supreme 
and inferior courts shall hold their offices during good behavior. 
They say, therefore, to the legislature, You may judge of the pro- 
priety, the utility, the necessity of organizing these courts ; but 
when established, you have done your duty. Anticipating the 
course of passion in future times, they say to the legislature, You 
shall not disgrace yourselves by exhibiting the indecent spectacle 
of judges established by one legislature removed by another : we 
will save you also from yourselves : we say, these judges shall hold 
their offices ; and surely, sir, to pretend that they can hold their 
office after the office is destroyed, is contemptible. 

The framers of this constitution had seen much, read much, and 
deeply reflected. They knew by experience the violence of pop- 
ular bodies ; and let it be remembered, that since that day, many 
of the states, taught by experience, have found it necessary to 
change their forms of government to avoid the effects of that vio- 
lence. The convention contemplated the very act you now at- 
tempt. They knew also the jealousy and the power of the states : 
and they established for your and for their protection, this most 
important department. 1 beg gentlemen to hear and remember 
what I say: it is this department alone, and it is the independence 
of this department, which can save you from civil w T ar. Yes, sir, 
adopt the language of gentlemen, say with them, by the act to 
which you are urged, " If w T e cannot remove the judges, we can 
destroy them." Establish thus the dependence of the judiciary 
department ; who will resort to them for protection against you ? 
Who will confide in, who will be bound by their decrees ? Are 
we then to resort to the ultimate reason of kins;s ? Are our anru- 
ments to fly from the mouths of our cannon ? 

We are told, that we may violate our constitution, because sim- 
ilar constitutions have been violated elsewhere. Two states have 
been cited to that effect, Maryland and Virginia. The honorable 
gentleman from Virginia tells us, that when this happened in the 
state he belongs to, no complaint was made by the judges. I will 
not inquire into that fact, although 1 have the protest of the judges 
now lying before me ; judges eminent for their talents, renowned 
for their learning, respectable for their virtue. I will not inquire 
what constitutions have been violated. I will not ask either when 
or where this dangerous practice began, or has been followed ; 1 
will admit the fact. What does it prove ? Does it prove, that 
because they have violated, we also may violate? Does it not 
prove directly the contrary ? Is it not the strongest reason on 
13 T 



146 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH 



earth for preserving the independence of our tribunals ? If it be 
true, that they have, with strong hand, seized their courts, ana 
bent them to their will, ought we not to give suitors a fair chance 
for justice in our courts ? or must the suffering citizen be deprived 
of all protection ? 

Tl>3 gentleman from Virginia has called our attention to certain 
cases which he considers as forming necessary exceptions to the 
principles for which we contend. Permit me to say, that neces- 
sity is a hard law, and frequently proves too much ; and let the 
gentleman recollect, that arguments which prove too much prove 
nothing. He has instanced a case where it may be proper to ap- 
point commissioners, for a limited time, to settle some particular 
description of controversies. Undoubtedly it is always in the 
power of congress to form a board of commissioners for particular 
purposes. He asks, Are these inferior courts, and must they also 
exist forever? I answer, that the nature of their offices must de- 
pend on the law by which they are created ; if called to exercise 
the judicial functions designated by the constitution, they must 
have an existence conformable to its injunctions. 

Again, he has instanced the Mississippi territory, claimed by 
and which may be surrendered to the state of Georgia; and a part 
of the union, which may be conquered by a foreign enemy. And 
he asks triumphantly, Are our inferior courts to remain after our 
jurisdiction is gone ? This case rests upon a principle so simple, 
that I am surprised the honorable member did not perceive the 
answer in the very moment when he made the objection. Is it 
by our act that a country is taken from us by a foreign enemy ? 
Is it by our consent that our jurisdiction is lost ? I had the honor, 
in speaking the other day, expressly, and for the most obvious 
reasons, to except the case of conquest. As well might we con- 
tend for the government of a town swallowed up by an earthquake. 

[Mr. Mason explained : he had supposed the case of territory 
conquered, and afterwards ceded to the conqueror, or some other 
territory ceded in lieu of it.] 

The case is precisely the same : until after the peace the con- 
quest is not complete. Every body knows, that until the cession 
by treaty, the original owner has the postliminary right to a terri- 
lory taken from him. Beyond all question, where congress are 
compelled to cede the territory, the judges can no longer exist, un- 
less the new sovereign confer the office. Over such territory the 
authority of the constitution ceases, and of course the rights 
which it confers. 

It is said, the judicial institution is intended for the benefit of 
the people, and not of the judge ; and it is complained of, that 
in speaking of the office, we say it is his office. Undoubtedly 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



147 



the institution is for the benefit of the people. But the question 
remains, How will it be rendered most beneficial ? Is it by making 
the judge independent, by making it his office, or is it by placing 
him in a state of abject dependence, so that the office shall be his 
to-day, and belong to another to-morrow? Let the gentleman 
hear the words of the constitution : it speaks of their offices ; con- 
sequently, as applied to a single judge, of his office, to be exer- 
cised by him for the benefit of the people of America, to which 
exercise his independence is as necessary as his office. 

The gentleman from Virginia has on this occasion likened the 
judge to a bridge, and to various other objects ; but I hope for his 
pardon, if, while I admire the lofty flights of his eloquence, I ab- 
stain from noticing observations which I conceive to be utterly 
irrelevant. 

The same honorable member has not only given us his history 
of the supreme court, but has told us of the manner in which 
they do business, and expressed his fears that, having little else to 
do, they would do mischief. We are not competent, sir, to ex- 
amine, nor ought we to prejudge, their conduct. I am persuaded 
they will do their duty, and presume they will have the decency 
to believe that we do our duty. In so far as they may be busied 
with the great mischief of checking the legislative or executive 
departments in any wanton invasion of our rights, I shall rejoice in 
that mischief. I hope, indeed, they will not be so busied, because 
I hope we shall give them no cause. But I also hope they will 
keep an eagle eye upon us lest we should. It was partly for this 
purpose they were established, and I trust that, when properly 
called on, they will dare to act. I know this doctrine is unpleas- 
ant : I know it is more popular to appeal to public opinion ; that 
equivocal, transient being, which exists no where and every where. 
But if ever the occasion calls for it, I trust that the supreme court 
will not neglect doing the great mischief of saving this constitu- 
tion, which can be done much better by their deliberations, than 
by resorting to what are called revolutionary measures. 

The honorable member from North Carolina, sore pressed by 
the delicate situation in which he is placed, thinks he has discov- 
ered a new argument in favor of the vote which he is instructed 
to give. As far as I can enter into his ideas, and trace their 
progress, he seems to have assumed the position which was to be 
proved, and then searched through the constitution, not to discover 
whether the legislature have the right contended for, but whether, 
admitting them to possess it, there may not be something which 
might not comport with that idea. I shall state the honorable 
member's argument as I understand it, and if mistaken, pray to be 
corrected. He read to us that clause which relates to impeach 



148 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH 



ment, and comparing it with that which fixes the tenure of ju- 
dicial office, observed that this clause must relate solely to a re- 
moval by the executive power, whose right to remove, though not, 
indeed, any where mentioned in the constitution, has been admit- 
ted in a practice founded on legislative construction. 

That as the tenure of the office is during good behavior, 
and as the clause respecting impeachment does not specify mis- 
behavior, there is evidently a cause of removal, which cannot 
be reached by impeachment, and of course (the executive not 
being permitted to remove) the right must necessarily devolve on 
the legislature. Is this the honorable member's argument ? If it 
be, the reply is very simple. Misbehavior is not a term known 
in our law ; the idea is expressed by the word misdemeanor ; 
which word is in the clause quoted respecting impeachments. 
Taking, therefore, the two together, and speaking plain old Eng- 
lish, the constitution says, " The judges shall hold their offices 
so long as they shall demean themselves well ; but if they shall 
misdemean — if they shall, on impeachment, be convicted of mis- 
demeanor — they shall be removed." Thus, sir, the honorable 
member will find that the one clause is just as broad as the other. 
He will see, therefore, that the legislature can assume no right 
from the deficiency of either, and will find that this clause, which 
he relied on, goes, if rightly understood, to the confirmation of 
our doctrine. 

Is there a member of this house,, who can lay his hand on his 
heart, and say, that consistently with the plain words of our con- 
stitution, we have a right to repeal this law ? 1 believe not. And 
if we undertake to construe this constitution to our purposes, and 
say that public opinion is to be our judge, there is an end to all 
constitutions. To what will not this dangerous doctrine lead ? 
Should it to-day be the popular wish to destroy the first magistrate, 
you can destroy him ; and should he to-morrow be able to concili- 
ate to himself the will of the people, and lead them to wish for 
your destruction, it is easily effected. Adopt this principle, and 
the whim of the moment will not only be the law, but the consti- 
tution of our country. 

The gentleman from Virginia has mentioned a great nation 
brought to the feet of one of her servants. But why is she in 
that situation ? Is it not because popular opinion was called on to 
decide every thing, until those who wore bayonets decided for all 
the rest? Our situation is peculiar. At present, our national 
compact can prevent a state from acting hostilely towards the 
general interest. But let this compact be destroyed, and each 
state becomes instantaneously vested with absolute sovereignty. 
Ts there no instance of a similar situation to be found in history ? 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



149 



Look at the states of Greece. They were once in a condition not 
unlike to that in which we should then stand. They treated the 
recommendations of their Amphictyonic council (which was more 
a meeting of ambassadors than a legislative assembly) as we did 
the resolutions of the old congress. Are we wise ? So were 
they. Are we valiant ? They also were brave. Have we one 
common language, and are we united under one head ? In this 
also there was a strong resemblance. But by their divisions, they 
became at first victims to the ambition of Philip, and were at 
length swallowed up in the Roman empire. Are we to form an 
exception to the general principles of human nature, and to all 
the examples of history ? And are the maxims of experience to 
become false when applied to our fate ? 

Some, indeed, flatter themselves, that our destiny will be like 
that of Rome. Such, indeed, it might be, if we had the same 
wise, but vile aristocracy, under whose guidance they became the 
masters of the world. But we have not that strong aristocratic 
arm, which can seize a wretched citizen, scourged almost to death 
by a remorseless creditor, turn him into the ranks, and bid him, as 
a soldier, bear our eagle in . triumph round the globe ! I hope to 
God we shall never have such an abominable institution. But 
what, I ask, will be the situation of these states (organized as they 
now are), if, by the dissolution of our national compact, they be 
left to themselves? What is the probable result? We shall 
either be the victims of foreign intrigue, and split into factions, fall 
under the domination of a foreign power, or else, after the 
misery and torment of civil war, become the subjects of an usurp- 
ing military despot. What but this compact, what but this spe- 
cific part of it, can save us from ruin ? The judicial power, that 
fortress of the constitution, is now to be overturned. Yes, with 
honest Ajax, I would not only throw a shield before it, I would 
build around it a wall of brass. But I am too weak to defend the 
rampart against the host of assailants. I must call to my assist- 
ance their good sense, their patriotism and their virtue. Do not, 
gentlemen, suffer the rage of passion to drive reason from her seat. 
If this law be indeed bad, let us join to remedy the defects. Has 
it been passed in a manner which wounded your pride, or roused 
your resentment ? Have, I conjure you, the magnanimity to par- 
don that offence. I entreat, I implore you, to sacrifice those angry 
passions to the interests of our country. Pour out this pride of 
opinion on the altar of patriotism. Let it be an expiatory libation 
for the weal of America. Do not, for God's sake, do not suffer 
that pride to plunge us all into the abyss of ruin. Indeed, indeed, 
it will be but of little, very little avail, whether one opinion or the 
other be right or wrong ; it will heal no wounds ; it will pay no 
13 * 



150 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH, &c. 



debts; it will rebuild no ravaged towns. Do not rely on thatpopu- 
lar will, which has brought us frail beings into political existence. 
That opinion is but a changeable thing. It will soon change. 
This very measure will change it. You will be deceived. Do 
not, I beseech you, in reliance on a foundation so frail, commit the 
dignity, the harmony, the existence of our nation to the wild wind. 
Trust not your treasure to the waves. Throw not your compass 
and your charts into the ocean. Do not believe that its billows 
will waft you into port. Indeed, indeed, you will be deceived. 
Cast not away this only anchor of our safety. 1 have seen its 
progress. I know the difficulties through which it was obtained. 
I stand in the presence of Almighty God, and of the world ; and 
I declare to you, that if you lose this charter, never ! no, never 
will you get another! We are now, perhaps, arrived at the part- 
ing point. Here, even here, we stand on the brink of fate. 
Pause — Pause — For Heaven's sake, Pause ! ! 



151 



SPEECH OF JAMES A. BAYARD, 

ON 

THE JUDICIARY ACT, 

DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE 
UNITED STATES, FEBRUARY 19, 1802.* 



Mr. Chairman, 
I must be allowed to express my surprise at the course pursued 
by the honorable gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Giles), in the re- 
marks which he has made on the subject before us. I had ex- 
pected that he would have adopted a different line of conduct. 
I had expected it as well from that sentiment of magnanim- 
ity which ought to have been inspired by a sense of the high 
ground he holds on the floor of this house, as from the professions 
of a desire to conciliate, which he has so repeatedly made during 
the session. We have been invited to bury the hatchet, and 
brighten the chain of peace. • We were disposed to meet on middle 
ground. We had assurances from the gentleman that he would 
abstain from reflections on the past, and that his only wish was, 
that w r e might unite in future in promoting the welfare of our com- 
mon country. We confided in the gentleman's sincerity, and 
cherished the hope, that if the divisions of party were not banish- 
ed from the house, its spirit would be rendered less intemperate. 
Such w x ere our impressions, when the mask was suddenly thrown 
aside, and we saw the torch of discord lighted and blazing before 
our eyes. Every effort has been made to revive the animosities 
of the house, and inflame the passions of the nation. I am at no 
loss to perceive why this course has been pursued. The gentle- 
man has been unwilling to rely upon the strength of his subject, 
and has, therefore, determined to make the measure a party ques- 
tion. He has probably secured success ; but would it not have 
been more honorable and more commendable to have left the de- 
cision of a great constitutional question to the understanding, and 
not to the prejudices of the house ? It was my ardent wish to dis 
cuss the subject with calmness and deliberation ; and I did intend 

* See the preceding speech. 



152 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



to avoid every topic which could awaken the sensibility of party. 
This was my temper and design when I took my seat yesterday. 
It is a course at present we are no longer at liberty to pursue. 
The gentleman has wandered far, very far, from the points of the 
debate, and has extended his animadversions to all the prominent 
measures of the former administrations. In following him through 
his preliminary observations, I necessarily lose sight of the bill 
upon your table. 

The gentleman commenced his strictures with the philosophic 
observation, that it was the fate of mankind to hold different 
opinions as to the form of government which was preferable : 
that some were attached to the monarchical, while others thought 
the republican more eligible. This, as an abstract remark, is cer- 
tainly true, and could have furnished no ground of offence, if it 
had not evidently appeared that an allusion was designed to be 
made to the parties in this country. Does the gentleman sup- 
pose that we have a less lively recollection than himself of the 
oath which we have taken to support the constitution ; that we are 
less sensible of the spirit of our government, or less devoted to the 
wishes of our constituents? Whatever impression it might be the 
intention of the gentleman to make, he does not believe that there 
exists in the country an anti-republican party. He will not venture 
to assert such an opinion on the floor of this house. That there 
may be a few individuals having a preference for monarchy is not 
improbable ; but will the gentleman from Virginia, or any other 
gentleman, affirm, in his place, that there is a party in the country 
who wish to establish monarchy ? Insinuations of this sort belong 
not to the legislature of the union. Their place is an election 
ground or an ale-house. Within these walls they are lost ; abroad, 
they have had an effect, and I fear are still capable of abusing 
popular credulity. 

We were next told of the parties which have existed, divided 
by the opposite views of promoting executive power and guarding 
the rights of the people. The gentleman did not tell us in plain 
language, but he wished it to be understood, that he and his friends 
were the guardians of the people's rights, and that we were the 
advocates of executive power 

I know that this is the distinction of party which some gentlemen 
have been anxious to establish ; but it is not the ground on which 
we divide. I am satisfied with the constitutional powers of the 
executive, and never wished nor attempted to increase them ; and 
I do not believe, that gentlemen on the other side of the house 
ever had a serious apprehension of danger from an increase of ex- 
ecutive authority. No, sir ; our views, as to the powers which do 
and ought to belong to the general and state governments, are the 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



153 



true sources of our divisions. 1 cooperate with the party to 
which I am attached, because I believe their true object and end 
is an honest and efficient support of the general government, in the 
exercise of the legitimate powers of the constitution. 

I pray to God I may be mistaken in the opinion I entertain as 
to the designs of gentlemen to whom I am opposed. Those de- 
signs I believe hostile to the powers of this government. State 
pride extinguishes a national sentiment. Whatever is taken from 
this government is given to the states. 

The ruins of this government aggrandize the states. There are 
states which are too proud to be controlled ; whose sense of great- 
ness and resource renders them indifferent to our protection, and 
induces a belief, that if no general government existed, their influ- 
ence would be more extensive, and their importance more conspic- 
uous. There are gentlemen who make no secret of an extreme 
point of depression, to which the government is to be sunk. To 
that point we are rapidly progressing. But I would beg gentle- 
men to remember, that human affairs are not to be arrested in 
their course, at artificial points. The impulse now given may 
be accelerated by causes at present out of view. And when those, 
who now design well, wish to stop, they may find their powers 
unable to resist the torrent. It is not true, that we ever wished to 
give a dangerous strength to executive power. While the govern- 
ment was in our hands, it was our duty to maintain its constitution- 
al balance, by preserving the energies of each branch. There 
never was an attempt to vary the relation of its powers. The 
struggle was to maintain the constitutional powers of the executive. 
The wild principles of French liberty were scattered through the 
country. We had our jacobins and disorganizes. They saw no 
difference between a king and a president ; and as the people of 
France had put down their king, they thought the people of Amer- 
ica ought to put down their president. They, who considered 
the constitution as securing all the principles of rational and prac- 
tical liberty, who were unwilling to embark upon the tempestuous 
sea of revolution in pursuit of visionary schemes, were denounced 
as monarchists. A line was drawn between the government and 
the people, and the friends of the government were marked as the 
enemies of the people. I hope, however, that the government 
and the people are now the same ; and I pray to God, that what 
has been frequently remarked may not, in this case, be discover- 
ed to be true, that they who have the name of the people the 
most often in their mouths, have their true interests the most 
seldom at their hearts. 

The honorable gentleman from Virginia wandered to the very 
confines of the federal administration, in search of materials the 
most inflammable and most capable of kindling the passions of his 
party. U 



154 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



He represents the government as seizing the first moment which 
presented itself, to create a dependent moneyed interest, ever devo- 
ted to its views. What are we to understand by this remark of 
the gentleman ? Does he mean to say, that congress did wrong 
in funding the public debt ? Does he mean to say, that the price 
of our liberty and independence ought not to have been paid ? Is 
he bold enough to denounce this measure as one of the federal 
victims marked for destruction ? Is it the design to tell us, that 
its day has not yet come, but is approaching ; and that the funding 
system is to add to the pile of federal ruins ? Do I hear the gen- 
tleman say, We will reduce the army to a shadow; we will give the 
navy to the worms ; the mint, which presented the people with the 
emblems of their liberty and of their sovereignty, we will abolish 
— the revenue shall depend upon the wind and waves, the judges 
shall be made our creatures, and the great w r ork shall be crown- 
ed and consecrated by relieving the country from an odious and 
oppressive public debt ? These steps. I presume, are to be taken 
in progression. 

The gentleman will pause at each, and feel the public pulse. 
As the fever increases, he will proceed, and the moment of deliri- 
um will be seized to finish the great work of destruction. 

The assumption of the state debts has been made an article 
of distinct crimination. It has been ascribed to the worst motives — 
to a design of increasing a dependent moneyed interest. Is it not 
well known, that those debts were part of the price of our revolution 
— that they rose in the exigency of our affairs, from the efforts of 
the particular states, at times when the federal arm could not be ex- 
tended to their relief? Each state was entitled to the protection 
of the union ; the defence was a common burden ; and every state 
had a right to expect, that the expenses attending its individual 
exertions in the general cause would be reimbursed from the pub- 
lic purse. I shall be permitted further to add, that the United 
States, having absorbed the sources of state revenue, except direct 
taxation, which was required for the support of the state govern- 
ments, the assumption of these debts was necessary to save some 
of the states from bankruptcy. 

The internal taxes are made one of the crimes of the federal 
administration. They were imposed, says the gentleman, to create 
a host of dependants on executive favor. This supposes the past 
administrations to have been not only very wicked, but very weak. 
They lay taxes in order to strengthen their influence. Who is so 
ignorant as not to know, that the imposition of a tax would create 
a hundred enemies for one friend? The name of excise was 
odious ; the details of collection were unavoidably expensive, and 
it was to operate upon a part of the community least disposed to 
support public burdens, and most ready to complain of their 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



weight. A little experience will give the gentleman a new idea 
of the patronage of this government. He will find it not that 
dangerous weapon in the hands of the administration which he 
has heretofore supposed it ; he will probably discover that the 
poison is accompanied by its antidote, and that an appointment of 
the government, while it gives to the administration one lazy friend, 
will raise up against it ten active enemies. No ! The motive as- 
cribed for the imposition of the internal taxes is unfounded as it 
is uncharitable. The federal administration, in creating burdens 
to support the credit of the nation, and to supply the means of 
its protection, knew that they risked the favor of those upon 
whom their power depended. They were willing to be the vic- 
tims, when the public good required. 

The duties on imports and tonnage furnished a precarious reve- 
nue — a revenue at all times exposed to deficiency, from causes 
beyond our reach. The internal taxes offered a fund less liable 
to be impaired by accident ; a fund which did not rob the mouth 
of labor, but was derived from the gratification of luxury. These 
taxes are an equitable distribution of the public burdens. Through 
this medium the western country is enabled to contribute some- 
thing to the expenses of a government which has expended and 
daily expends such large sums for its defence. When these taxes 
were laid, they were indispensable. With the aid of them it has 
been difficult to prevent an increase of the public debt. And not- 
withstanding the fairy prospects which now dazzle our eyes, I un- 
dertake to say, if you abolish them this session, you will be obliged 
to restore them, or supply their place by a direct tax, before the 
end of two years. Will the gentleman say, that the direct tax 
was laid in order to enlarge the bounds of patronage ? Will he 
deny, that this was a measure to which we had been urged for 
years by our adversaries, because they foresaw in it the ruin of 
federal power? My word for it, no administration will ever be 
strengthened by a patronage united with taxes which the people 
are sensible of paying. 

We were next told, that, to get an army, an Indian war was 
necessary. The remark was extremely bald, as the honorable 
gentleman did not allege a single reason for the position. He did 
not undertake to state, that it was a wanton war, or provoked by 
the government. He did not even venture to deny, that it was a 
war of defence, and entered into in order to protect our brethren 
on the frontiers from the bloody scalping-knife and murderous 
tomahawk of the savage. What ought the government to have 
done? Ought they to have estimated the value of the blood 
which probably would be shed, and the amount of the devastation 
likely to be committed, before they determined on resistance? 
They raised an army, and after great expense and various fortune. 



156 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



they have secured the peace and safety of the frontiers. But why 
was the army mentioned on this occasion, unless to forewarn us of 
the fate which awaits them, and to tell us, that their days are 
numbered ? T cannot suppose that the gentleman mentioned this 
little army, distributed on a line of three thousand miles, for the 
purpose of giving alarm to three hundred thousand free and brave 
yeomanry, ever ready to defend the liberties of the country. 

The honorable gentleman proceeded to inform the committee, 
that the government, availing itself of the depredations of the Al- 
gerines, created a navy. Did the gentleman mean to insinuate, 
that this war was invited by the United States ? Has he any doc- 
uments or proof to render the suspicion colorable ? No, sir ; he 
has none. He well knows, that the Algerine aggressions were 
extremely embarrassing to the government. When they com- 
menced, w T e had no marine force to oppose to them. We had no 
harbors or places of shelter in the Mediterranean. A war with 
these pirates could be attended with neither honor nor profit. It 
might cost a great deal of blood, and in the end it might be feared, 
that a contest so far from home, subject to numberless hazards 
and difficulties, could not be maintained. What would gentlemen 
have had the government to do ? I know there are those who are 
ready to answer — Abandon the Mediterranean trade. But would 
this have done ? The corsairs threatened to pass the Straits, and 
were expected in the Atlantic. Nay, sir, it was thought that our 
very coasts would not have been secure. 

Will gentlemen go farther, and say, that the United States ought 
to relinquish their commerce ? I believe this opinion has high 
authority to support it. It has been said, that we ought to be 
only cultivators of the earth, and make the nations of Europe 
our carriers. 

This is not an occasion to examine the solidity of this opinion ; 
but I will only ask, admitting the administration were disposed to 
turn the pursuits of the people of this country from the ocean to 
the land, whether there is a power in the government, or whether 
there would be, if we were as strong as the government of Tur- 
key, or even of France, to accomplish the object. With a sea- 
coast of seventeen hundred miles, with innumerable harbors and 
inlets, with a people enterprising beyond example, is it possible to 
say, you will have no ships, or sailors, or merchants ? The peo- 
ple of this country will never consent to give up their navigation, 
and every administration will find themselves constrained to pro- 
vide means to protect their commerce. 

In respect to the Algerines, the late administrations were singu- 
larly unfortunate. They were obliged to fight or pay them. 
The true policy was to hold a purse in one hand and a sword in 
ihe other. This was the policy of the government. Every 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



commercial nation in Europe was tributary to these petty barba- 
rians. It was not esteemed disgraceful. It was an affair of cal- 
culation, and the administration made the best bargain in their 
power. They have heretofore been scandalized for paying tribute 
to a pirate, and now they are criminated for preparing a few frig- 
ates to protect our citizens from slavery and chains. Sir, I be- 
lieve, on this and many other occasions, if the ringer of Heaven 
had pointed out a course, and the government had pursued it, yet 
that they would not have escaped the censure and reproaches of 
their enemies. 

We were told, that the disturbances in Europe were made a 
pretext for augmenting the army and navy. I will not, Mr. 
Chairman, at present go into a detailed view of the events which 
compelled the government to put on the armor of defence, and to 
resist by force the French aggressions. All the world know the 
efforts which were made to accomplish an amicable adjustment of 
differences with that power. It is enough to state, that ambassa- 
dors of peace were twice repelled from the shores of France with 
ignominy and contempt. It is enough to say, that it was not till 
after we had drunk the cup of humiliation to the dregs, that the 
national spirit was roused to a manly resolution to depend only on 
their God and their own courage for protection. What, sir, did it 
grieve the gentleman, that we did not crouch under the rod of the 
Mighty Nation, and, like the petty powers of Europe, tamely 
surrender our independence ? Would he have had the people of 
the United States relinquish, without a struggle, those liberties 
which had cost so much blood and treasure ? We had not, sir, 
recourse to arms till the mouths of our rivers were choked with 
French corsairs ; till our shores, and every harbor, were insulted 
and violated ; till our commercial capital had been seized, and no 
safety existed for the remainder but the protection of force. At 
this moment, a noble enthusiasm electrized the country ; the 
national pulse beat high, and we were prepared to submit to eve- 
ry sacrifice, determined only that our independence should be the 
last. At that time, an American was a proud name in Europe ; 
but I fear, much I fear, that in the course we are now likely to 
pursue, the time will soon arrive when our citizens abroad will be 
ashamed to acknowledge their country. 

The measures of '98 grew out of the public feelings. They 
were loudly demanded by the public voice. It was the people 
who drove the government to arms, and not, as the gentleman ex- 
pressed it, the government which pushed the people to the X. Y. 
Z. of their political designs before they understood the A. B. C 
of their political principles. 

But what, sir, did the gentleman mean by his X. Y. Z. ? i 
must look for something very significant, something more than a 
14 



158 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



quaintness of expression, or a play upon words, in what falls from 
a gentleman of his learning and ability. Did he mean that the 
despatches which contained those letters were impostures, design- 
ed to deceive and mislead the people of America ? — intended to 
rouse a false spirit not justified by events ? Though the gentle- 
man had no respect for some of the characters of that embassy ; 
though he felt no respect for the chief justice, or the gentleman 
appointed from South Carolina, two characters as pure, as honor- 
able and exalted, as any the country can boast of, yet I should 
have expected that he would have felt some tenderness for Mr. 
Gerry, in whom his party had since given proofs of undiminished 
confidence. Does the gentleman believe that Mr. Gerry would 
have joined in the deception, and assisted in fabricating a tale 
which was to blind his countrymen and to enable the government 
to destroy their liberties ? Sir, I will not avail myself of the 
equivocations or confessions of Talleyrand himself ; I say these 
gentlemen will not dare publicly to deny what is attested by the 
hand and seal of Mr. Gerry. 

The truth of these despatches admitted, what was your govern- 
ment to do ? Give us, say the directory, one million two hun- 
dred thousand livres for our own purse, and purchase fifteen mil- 
lions of dollars of Dutch debt (which was worth nothing), and we 
will receive your ministers and negotiate for peace. 

It was only left to the government to choose between an un- 
conditional surrender of the honor and independence of the coun- 
try, or a manly resistance. Can you blame, sir, the adminis- 
tration for a line of conduct which has reflected on the nation 
so much honor, and to which, under God, it owes its present 
prosperity? 

These are the events of the general government, which the 
gentleman has reviewed in succession, and endeavored to render 
odious or suspicious. For all this I could have forgiven him ; but 
there is one thing for which I will not, I cannot forgive him. I 
mean his attempt to disturb the ashes of the dead ; to disturb the 
ashes of the great and good Washington. Sir, I might degrade 
by attempting to eulogize this illustrious character. The work is 
infinitely beyond my powers. I will only say that as long as ex- 
alted talents and virtues confer honor among men, the name of 
Washington will be held in veneration. 

After, Mr. Chairman, the honorable member had exhausted one 
quiver of arrows against the late executive, he opened another, 
equally poisoned, against the judiciary. He has told us, sir, that 
when the power of the government was rapidly passing from fed- 
eral hands, after we had heard the thundering voice of the people 
which dismissed us from their service, we erected a judiciary, 
which we expected would afford us the shelter of an inviolable 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



159 



sanctuary. The gentleman is deceived. We knew better, sir, 
the characters who were to succeed us; and we knew that nothing 
was sacred in the eyes of infidels. No, sir, I never had a thought 
that any thing belonging to the federal government was holy in 
the eyes of those gentlemen. I could never, therefore, imagine 
that a sanctuary could be built up which would not be violated. 
I believe these gentlemen regard public opinion because their power 
depends upon it; but I believe they respect no existing establish- 
ment of the government, and if public opinion could be brought 
to support them, I have no doubt they would annihilate the whole. 
I shall at present only say further on this head, that we thought 
the reorganization of the judicial system a useful measure, and 
we considered it as a duty to employ the remnant of our power to 
the best advantage of the country. 

The honorable gentleman expressed his joy that the constitu- 
tion had at last become sacred in our eyes ; that we formerly held 
that it meant every thing or nothing. I believe, sir, that the con- 
stitution formerly appeared different in our eyes from what it now 
appears in the eyes of the dominant party. We formerly saw in 
it the principles of a fair and goodly creation. We looked upon it 
as a source of peace, of safety, of honor and of prosperity to the 
country. But now the view is changed ; it is the instrument of 
wild and dark destruction. It is a weapon which is to prostrate 
every establishment, to which the nation owes the unexampled 
blessings which it enjoys. 

The present state of the country is an unanswerable com- 
mentary upon our construction of the constitution. It is true 
that we made it mean much, and I hope, sir, we shall not be 
taught by the present administration that it can mean even worse 
than nothing. 

The gentleman has not confined his animadversions to the 
individual establishment, but has gone so far as to make the judges 
the subject of personal invective. They have been charged with 
having transgressed the bounds of judicial duty, and become the 
apostles of a political sect. We have heard of their travelling 
about the country for little other purpose than to preach the fed- 
eral doctrines to the people. 

Sir, I think a judge should never be a partisan. No man 
would be more ready to condemn a judge who carried his polit- 
ical prejudices or antipathies on the bench. But I have still to 
learn that such a charge can be sustained against the judges of 
the United States. 

The constitution is the supreme law of the land, and they have 
taken pains, in their charges to grand juries, to unfold and explain 
its principles. Upon similar occasions, they have enumerated the 
laws which compose our criminal code, and when some of those 



160 MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 

laws nave been denounced by the enemies of the administration 
as unconstitutional, the judges may have felt themselves called 
upon to express their judgments upon that point, and the reasons 
of their opinions. 

So far, but no farther, I believe, the judges have gone : in going 
thus far, they have done nothing more than faithfully discharge 
their duty. 

But if, sir, they have offended against the constitution or laws 
of the country, why are they not impeached ? The gentleman 
now holds the sword of justice : the judges are not a privileged 
order ; they have no shelter but their innocence. 

But in any view are the sins of the former judges to be fastened 
upon the new judicial system? Would you annihilate a system, 
because some men under part of it had acted wrong ? The con- 
stitution has pointed out a mode of punishing and removing the 
men, and does not leave this miserable pretext for the wanton ex- 
ercise of powers which is now contemplated. 

The honorable member has thought himself justified in making a 
charge of a serious and frightful nature against the judges. They 
have been represented going about searching out victims of the 
sedition law. But no fact has been stated ; no proof has been ad- 
duced, and the gentleman must excuse me for refusing my belief 
to the charge till it is sustained by stronger and better ground 
than assertion. 

If, however, Mr. Chairman, the eyes of the gentleman are de- 
lighted with victims — if objects of misery are grateful to his feel- 
ings — let me turn his view from the walks of the judges to the 
track of the present executive. It is in this path we see the real 
victims of stern, uncharitable, unrelenting power. It is here, sir, 
we see the soldier who fought the battles of the revolution ; who 
spilt his blood and wasted his strength to establish the indepen- 
dence of his country, deprived of the reward of his services, and 
left to pine in penury and wretchedness. It is along this path 
that you may see helpless children crying for bread, and gray 
hairs sinking in sorrow to the grave. It is here that no inno- 
cence, no merit, no truth, no services, can save the unhappy 
sectary who does not believe in the creed of those in power. I 
have been forced upon this subject ; and before I leave it. allow 
me to remark, that without inquiring into the right of the presi- 
dent to make vacancies in office, during the recess of the senate, 
but admitting the power to exist, yet that it never was given by 
the constitution to enable the chief magistrate to punish the in- 
sults, to revenge the wrongs, or to indulge the antipathies of the 
man. If the discretion exists, I have no hesitation in saying that 
it is abused when exercised from any other motives than the pub- 
lic good And when I see the will of a president precipitating 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



161 



from office men of probity, knowledge and talents, against whom 
the community has no complaint, 1 consider it as a wanton and 
dangerous abuse of power. And when I see men who have been 
the victims of this abuse of power, I view them as the proper ob- 
jects of national sympathy and commiseration. 

Among the causes of impeachment against the judges is their 
attempt to force the sovereignties of the states to bow before them. 
We have heard them called an ambitious body politic ; and the 
fact I allude to has been considered as full proof of the inordinate 
ambition of the body. 

Allow me to say, sir, the gentleman knows too much not to 
know that the judges are not a body politic. He supposed, per- 
haps, there was an odium attached to the appellation, which it 
might serve his purposes to connect w T ith the judges. But, sir, 
how do you derive any evidence of the ambition of the judges 
from their decision, that the states under our federal compact were 
compellable to do justice ? Can it be shown, or even said, that the 
judgment of the court was a false construction of the constitution ? 
The policy of later times, on this point, has altered the constitu- 
tion, and, in my opinion, has obliterated its fairest feature. I am 
taught by my principles, that no power ought to be superior to 
justice. It is not that I wish to see the states humbled in dust 
and ashes ; it is not that 1 wish to see the pride of any man flat- 
tered by their degradation ; but it is that I wish to see the great 
and the small, the sovereign and the subject, bow at the altar of' 
justice, and submit to those obligations from which the Deity him- 
self is not exempt. What was the effect of this provision in the 
constitution ? It prevented the states being the judges in their 
own cause, and deprived them of the power of denying justice. Is 
there a princiole of ethics more clear, than that a man ought not to 
be a judge in his own cause ? and is not the principle equally 
strong when applied, not to one man, but to a collective body ? It 
was the happiness of our situation which enabled us to force the 
greatest state to submit to the yoke of justice ; and it would have 
been the glory of the country in the remotest times, if the princi- 
ple in the constitution had been maintained. What had the states 
to dread ? Could they fear injustice when opposed to a feeble in- 
dividual ? Has a great man reason to fear from a poor one ? 
And could a potent state be alarmed by the unfounded claim of a 
single person ? For my part, I have always thought that an inde- 
pendent tribunal ought to be provided, to judge on the claims 
against this government. The power ought not to be in our own 
hands. We are not impartial, and are therefore liable, without 
our knowledge, to do wrong. I never could see why the whole 
community should not be bound by as strong an obligation to do 
justice to an individual, as one man is bound to do. it to another. 
14* X 



162 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



In England the subject has a better chance for justice against 
the sovereign, than in this country a citizen has against a state. 
The crown is never its own arbiter ; and they who sk in judgment 
have no interest in the event of their decision. 

The judges, sir, have been criminated for their conduct in rela- 
tion to the sedition act, and have been charged with searching for 
victims who were sacrificed under it. The charge is easily made ; 
but has the gentleman the means of supporting it ? It was the 
evident design of the gentleman to attach the odium of the sedition 
law to the judiciary ; on this score the judges are surely innocent. 
They did not pass the act ; the legislature made the law, and they 
were obliged by their oaths to execute it. The judges decided 
the law to be constitutional, and I am not now going to agitate the 
question. I did hope, when the law passed, that its effect would 
be useful. It did not touch the freedom of speech, and was de- 
signed only to restrain the enormous abuses of the press. It went 
no further than to punish malicious falsehoods, published with the 
wicked intention of destroying the government. No innocent man 
ever did or could have suffered under the law. No punishment 
could be inflicted till a jury was satisfied that a publication was 
false, and that the party charged, knowing it to be false, had pub- 
lished it with an evil design. 

The misconduct of the judges, however, on this subject, has 
been considered by the gentleman the more aggravated, by an at- 
tempt to extend the principles of the sedition act, by an adoption 
of those of the common law. Connected with this subject, such 
an attempt was never made by the judges. They have held, gen- 
erally, that the constitution of the United States was predicated 
upon an existing common law. Of the soundness of that opinion 
I never had a doubt. I should scarcely go too far, were I to say, 
that, stripped of the common law, there would be neither constitu- 
tion nor government. The constitution is unintelligible without 
reference to the common law. And were we to go into our courts 
of justice, with the mere statutes of the United States, not a step 
could be taken, not even a contempt could be punished. Those 
statutes prescribe no forms of pleadings ; they contain no prin- 
ciples of evidence ; they furnish no rule of property. If the com- 
mon law does not exist in most cases, there is no law but the will 
of the judge. 

I have never contended that the whole of the common law at- 
tached to the constitution, but only such parts as were consonant 
to the nature and spirit of our government. We have nothing to 
do with the law of the ecclesiastical establishment, nor with any 
principle of monarchical tendency. What belongs to us, and what 
is unsuitable, is a question for the sound discretion of the judges. 
The principle is analogous to one which is found in the writings of 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



163 



all jurists and commentators. When a colony is planted, it is es- 
tablished subject to such parts of the law of the mother country as 
are applicable to its situation. When our forefathers colonized the 
wilderness of America, they brought with them the common law 
of England. They claimed it as their birthright, and they left it 
as the most valuable inheritance to their children. Let me say, 
that this same common law, now so much despised and vilified, is 
the cradle of the rights and liberties which we now enjoy. It is 
to the common law we owe our distinction from the colonists of 
France, of Portugal, and of Spain. How long is it since we have 
discovered the malignant qualities which are now ascribed to this 
law ? Is there a state in the union which has not adopted it, and 
in which it is not in force ? Why is it refused to the federal con- 
stitution ? Upon the same principle that every power is denied 
which tends to invigorate the government. Without this law the 
constitution becomes, what perhaps many gentlemen wish to see 
it, a dead letter. 

For ten years it has been the doctrine of our courts, that the 
common law was in force ; and yet can gentlemen say, that there 
has been a victim who has suffered under it ? Many have expe- 
rienced its protection ; none can complain of its oppression. 

In order to demonstrate the aspiring ambition of this body poli- 
tic, the judiciary, the honorable gentleman stated with much em- 
phasis and feeling, that the judges had been hardy enough to send 
their mandate into the executive cabinet. Was the gentleman, 
sir, acquainted with^the fact when he made this statement ? It dif- 
fers essentially from what I know I have heard upon the subject. 
I shall be allowed to state the fact. 

Several commissions had been made out by the late administra- 
tion for justices of the peace of this territory. The commissions 
were complete ; they were signed and sealed, and left with the 
clerks of the office of state to be handed to the persons appointed. 
The new administration found them on the clerk's table, and 
thought proper to withhold them. These officers are not depend- 
ent on the will of the president. The persons named in the com- 
missions considered that their appointments were complete, and 
that the detention of their commissions was a wrong, and not jus- 
tified by the legitimate authority of the executive. They applied 
to the supreme court for a rule upon the secretary of state, to show 
cause why a mandamus should not issue, commanding him to de- 
liver up the commissions. Let me ask, sir, what could the judges 
do ? The rule to show cause was a matter of course upon a new 
point, at the least doubtful. To have denied it, would have been 
to shut the doors of justice against the parties. It concludes 
nothing, neither the jurisdiction nor the regularity of the act. The 
judges did their duty ; they gave an honorable proof of their in 



164 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



dependence. They listened to the complaint of an individual 
against your president, and have shown themselves disposed to 
grant redress against the greatest man in the government. If a 
wrong has been committed, and the constitution authorizes their 
interference, will gentlemen say that the secretary of state, or even 
the president, is not subject to law? And if they violate the law, 
where can we apply for redress but to our courts of justice ? But, 
sir, it is not true that the judges issued their mandate to the exec- 
utive ; they have only called upon the secretary of state to show 
them that what he has done is right. It is but an incipient pro- 
ceeding, which decides nothing. 

[Mr. Giles rose to explain. — He said, that the gentleman from 
Delaware had ascribed to him many things which he did not say, 
and had afterwards undertaken to refute them. He had only said 
that mandatory process had issued ; that the course pursued by the 
court indicated a belief by them that they had jurisdiction, and 
that, in the event of no cause being shown, a mandamus would issue. 
Mr. Bayard then continued :] 

I stated the gentleman's words as I took them down. It is im- 
material whether the mistake was in the gentleman's expression, 
or in my understanding. He has a right to explain, and I will 
take his position as he now states it. I deny, sir, that mandatory 
process has issued. Such process would be imperative, and sup- 
pose a jurisdiction to exist ; the proceeding which has taken place, 
is no more than notice of the application for justice made to the 
court, and allows the party to show either that no wrong has been 
committed, or that the court has no jurisdiction over the subject. 
Even, sir, if the rule were made absolute, and the mandamus is- 
sued, it would not be definitive ; but it would be competent for 
the secretary, in a return to the writ, to justify the act which has 
been done, or to show that it is not a subject of judicial cog- 
nizance. 

It is not till after an insufficient return, that a peremptory man- 
damus issues. In this transaction, so far from seeing any thing 
culpable in the conduct of your judges, I think, sir, that they have 
given a strong proof of the value of that constitutional provision 
which makes them independent. They are not terrified by the 
frowns of executive power, and dare to judge between the rights 
of a citizen and the pretensions of a president. 

I believe, Mr. Chairman, I have gone through most of the pre- 
liminary remarks which the honorable gentleman thought proper 
to make, before he proceeded to the consideration of those points 
which properly belong to the subject before the committee. I 
have not supposed the topics 1 have been discussing had any con- 
nection with the bill on your table ; but I felt it as a duty not to 
leave unanswered charges against the former administrations and 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



165 



our judges, of the most insidious tendency, which I know to be un- 
founded, and which were calculated and designed to influence the 
decision on the measure now proposed. Why, Mr. Chairman, 
has the present subject been combined with the army, the navy, 
the internal taxes, and the sedition law ? Was it to involve them 
in one common odium, and to consign them to one common fate ? 
Do I see in the preliminary remarks of the honorable member the 
title-page of the volume of measures which are to be pursued ? 
Are gentlemen sensible of the extent to which it is designed to 
lead them ? They are now called on to reduce the army, to di- 
minish the navy, to abolish the mint, to destroy the independence 
of the judiciary ; and will they be able to stop when they are next 
required to blot out the public debt, that hateful source of moneyed 
interest and aristocratic influence ? Be assured, sir, we see but 
a small part of the system which has been formed. Gentlemen 
know the advantage of progressive proceedings ; and my life for it, 
if they can carry the people with them, their career will not be 
arrested while a trace -remains of what was done by the former ad- 
ministration. 

There was another remark of the honorable member which I 
must be allowed to notice. The pulpit, sir, has not escaped in- 
vective. The ministers of the gospel have been represented, like 
the judges, forgetting the duties of their calling, and employed in 
disseminating the heresies of federalism. Am I then, sir, to un- 
derstand that religion is also denounced, and that your churches 
are to be shut up ? Are we to be deprived, sir, both of law and 
gospel ? Where do the principles of the gentleman end ? When 
the system of reform is completed, what will remain ? I pray God 
that this flourishing country, which, under his providence, has at- 
tained such a height of prosperity, may yet escape the desolation 
suffered by another nation by the practice of similar doctrines. 

I beg pardon of the committee for having consumed so much 
time upon points little connected with the subject of the debate. 
Till I heard the honorable member from Virginia yesterday, I was 
prepared only to discuss the merits of the bill upon which you are 
called to vote. His preliminary remarks were designed to have an 
effect which I deemed it material to endeavor to counteract ; and I 
therefore yielded to the necessity of pursuing the course he had 
taken, though I was conscious of departing very far from the sub- 
ject before the committee. To the discussion of that subject, 1 
now return with great satisfaction, and shall consider it under the 
two views it naturally presents — the constitutionality and the ex- 
pediency of the measure. I find it most convenient to consider, 
first, the question of expediency, and shall, therefore, beg permis- 
sion to invert the natural order of the inquiry. 

To show the inexpediency of the present bill, I shall endeavoi 



166 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



to prove the expediency of the judicial law of the last session. In 
doing this, it will he necessary to take a view of the leading fea- 
tures of the preexisting system, to inquire into its defects, and to 
examine how far the evils complained of were remedied by the 
provisions of the late act. It is not my intention to enter into the 
details of the former system ; it can be necessary only to state so 
much as will distinctly show its defects. 

There existed, sir, a supreme court having original cognizance 
in a few cases, but principally a court of appellate jurisdiction. 
This was the great national court of dernier resort. Before this 
tribunal questions of unlimited magnitude and consequence, both 
of a civil and political nature, received their final decision ; and I 
may be allowed to call it the national crucible of justice, in which 
the judgments of inferior courts were to be reduced to their ele 
ments, and cleansed from every impurity. There was a circuit 
court, composed in each district of a judge of the supreme court 
and the district judge. This was the chief court of business both 
of a civil and criminal nature. 

In each district, a court was established for affairs of revenue, 
and of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction. It is not necessary, 
for the purposes of the present argument, to give a more extensive 
outline of the former plan of our judiciary. We discover that the 
judges of the supreme court, in consequence of their composing a 
part of the circuit courts, were obliged to travel from one extremi- 
ty to the other of this extensive country. In order to be in the 
court-house two months ki the year, they were forced to be upon 
the road six. The supreme court, being the court of last resort, 
having final jurisdiction over questions of incalculable importance, 
ought certainly to be filled with men not only of probity, but of 
great talents, learning, patience and experience. The union of 
these qualit'es is rarely, very rarely, found in men who have not 
passed the meridian of life. My lord Coke tells us, no man is fit 
to be a judge till he has numbered the lucubrations of twenty 
years. Men of studious habits are seldom men of strong bodies. 
In the course of things, it could not be expected, that men, fit to 
be judges of your supreme courts, would be men capable of trav- 
ersing the mountains and wildernesses of this extensive country. 
It was an essential and great defect in this court, that it required 
in men the combination of qualities which it is a phenomenon to 
find united. It required that they should possess the learning and 
experience of years, and the strength and activity of youth. I 
may say further, Mr. Chairman, that this court, from its constitu- 
tion, tended to deterioration and not to improvement. Your 
judges, instead of being in their closets, and increasing, by reflec- 
tion and study, their stock of wisdom and knowledge, had not 
even the means of repairing the ordinary waste of time. Instead 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



167 



of becoming more learned and more capable, they would gradual- 
ly lose the fruits of their former industry. Let me ask, if this was 
not a vicious construction of a court of the highest authority and 
greatest importance in the nation — in a court from which no one 
had an appeal, and to whom it belonged to establish the leading 
principles of national jurisprudence. 

In the constitution of this court, as a court of last resort, there 
was another essential defect. The appeals to this court are from 
the circuit courts. The circuit court consists of the district judge and 
a judge of the supreme court. In cases where the district judge is 
interested, where he has been counsel, and where he has decided 
in the court below, the judge of the supreme court alone composes 
the circuit court. What, then, is substantially the nature of this 
appellate jurisdiction ? In truth and practice, the appeal is from 
a member of a court to the body of the same court. The circuit 
courts are but emanations of the supreme court. Cast your eyes 
on the supreme court ; you see it disappear, and its members 
afterwards arising in the shape of circuit judges. Behold the cir- 
cuit judges ; they vanish, and immediately you perceive the form 
of the supreme court appearing. There is, sir, a magic in this 
arrangement, which is not friendly to justice. When the supreme 
court assembles, appeals come from the various circuits of the 
United States. There are appeals from the decisions of each 
judge. The judgments of each member pass in succession under 
the revision of the whole body. Will not a judge, while he is ex- 
amining the sentence of a brother to-day, remember that that 
brother will sit in judgment upon his proceedings to-morrow ? 
Are the members of a court thus constituted free from all motive, 
exempt from all bias, which could even remotely influence opinion 
on the point of strict right; and yet let me ask, emphatically, 
whether this court, being the court of final resort, should not be so 
constituted, that the world should believe, and every suitor be satis- 
fied, that, in weighing the justice of a cause, nothing entered the 
scales but its true merits. ( 

Your supreme court, sir, I have never considered as any thing 
more than the judges of assize sitting in bank. It is a system with 
which, perhaps, I should find no fault, if the judges sitting in bank 
did not exercise a final jurisdiction. Political institutions should 
be so calculated as not to depend upon the virtues, but to guard 
against the vices and weaknesses of men. It is possible, that a 
judge of the supreme court would not be influenced by the esprit 
du corps, that he would neither be gratified by the affirmance, nor 
mortified by the reversal of his opinions ; but this, sir, is estimating 
the strength and purity of human nature upon a possible, but not 
on its ordinary scale. 

I believe, Mr. Chairman, that, in practice, the formation of thr 



168 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



supreme court frustrated, in a great degree, the design of its insti- 
tution. I believe that many suitors were discouraged from seed- 
ing a revision of the opinions of the circuit court, by a deep im- 
pression of the difficulties to be surmounted in obtaining the re- 
versal of the judgment of a court from the brethren of the judge who 
pronounced the judgment. The benefit of a court of appeals, well 
constituted, is not confined to the mere act of reviewing the sen- 
tence of an inferior court, but is more extensively useful by the 
general operation of the knowledge of its existence upon inferior 
courts. The power of uncontrollable decision is of the most deli- 
cate and dangerous nature. When exercised in the courts, it is 
more formidable than by any other branch of our government. 
It is the judiciary only, which can reach the person, the property 
or life of an individual. The exercise of their power is scattered 
over separate cases, and creates no common cause. The great 
safety under this power arises from the right of appeal. A sense 
of this right combines the reputation of the judge with the justice 
of the cause. In my opinion, it is a strong proof of the wisdom 
of a judicial system, when few causes are carried into the court of 
the last resort. I would say, if it were not paradoxical, that the 
very existence of a court of appeals ought to destroy the occasion 
for it. The conscience of the judge, sir, will, no doubt, be a great 
check upon him in the unbounded field of discretion created by 
the uncertainty of law ; but I should, in general cases, more rely 
upon the effect produced by his knowledge, that an inadvertent or 
designed abuse of power was liable to be corrected by a superior 
tribunal. A court of appellate jurisdiction, organized upon sound 
principles, should exist, though few causes arose for their decision ; 
for it is surely better to have a court and no causes, than to have 
causes and no court. I now proceed, sir, to consider the defects 
which are plainly discernible, or which have been discovered by 
practice in the constitution of the circuit courts. 

These courts, from information which I have received, I appre- 
hend, w T ere originally constructed upon a fallacious principle. I 
have heard it stated, that the design of placing the judges of the 
supreme court in the circuit courts, was to establish uniform rules 
of decision throughout the United States. It was supposed that 
the presiding judges of the circuit courts, proceeding from the same 
body, would tend to identify the principles and rules of decision in 
the several districts. In practice a contrary effect has been dis- 
covered to be produced by the peculiar organization of these 
courts. In practice we have found not only a want of uniformity 
*)f rule between the different districts, but no uniformity of rule in 
the same district. No doubt there was a uniformity in the de- 
cisions of the same judge ; but as the same judge seldom sat twice 
successively in the same district, and sometimes not till after an 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



169 



interval of two or three years, his opinions were forgotten or re- 
versed before he returned. The judges were not educated in the 
same school. The practice of the courts, the forms of proceed- 
ing, as well as the rules of property, are extremely various in the 
different quarters of the United States. The lawyers of the East- 
ern, the Middle and Southern States, are scarcely professors of the 
same science. These courts were in a state of perpetual fluctua- 
tion. The successive terms gave you courts, in the same district, 
as different from each other as those of Connecticut and Virginia. 
No system of practice could grow up, no certainty of rule could 
be established. The seeds sown in one term scarcely vegetated 
before they were trodden under foot. The condition of a suitor 
was terrible ; the ground was always trembling under his feet. 
The opinion of a former judge was no precedent to his successor. 
Each considered himself bound to follow the light of his own un- 
derstanding. To exemplify these remarks, I will take the liberty 
of stating a case which came under my own observation. An ap- 
plication before one judge was made to quash an attachment in 
favor of a subsequent execution creditor ; the application was re- 
sisted upon two grounds, and the learned judge, to whom the ap- 
plication was first made, expressing his opinion in support of both 
grounds, dismissed the motion. At the succeeding court, a differ- 
ent judge presided ; and the application was renewed and answered 
upon the same grounds. The second learned judge was of opinion, 
that one point had no validity, but he considered the other sustain- 
able, and was about also to dismiss the motion, but, upon being 
pressed, at last consented to grant a rule to show cause. At the 
third term, a third learned judge was on the bench, and though the 
case was urged upon its former principles, he was of opinion, that 
both answers to the application were clearly insufficient, and ac- 
cordingly quashed the attachment. When the opinions of his pred- 
ecessors were cited, he replied that every man was to be saved 
by his own faith. 

Upon the opinion of one judge, a suitor would set out in a long 
course of proceedings, and after losing much time and wasting 
much money, he would be met by another judge, who would tell 
him he had mistaken his road, that he must return to the place 
from which he started, and pursue a different track. Thus it 
happened as to the chancery process, to compel the appearance 
of a defendant. Some of the judges considered themselves bound 
by the rules in the English books, while others conceived that 
a power belonged to the court, upon the service of a subpoena, to 
make a short rule for the defendant to appear and answer, or that 
the bill should be taken pro confesso. A case of this kind occur- 
red where much embarrassment was experienced. In the circuit 
court for the district of Pennsylvania, a bill in chancery was filed 
15 Y 



170 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



against a person, who then happened to be in that district, but 
whose place of residence was in the North-Western Territory. The 
subpoena was served, but there was no answer nor appearance. 
The court to which the writ was returned, without difficulty, upon 
an application, granted a rule for the party to appear and answer 
at the expiration of a limited time, or that the bill be taken pro 
confesso. A personal service of this rule being necessary, the 
complainant was obliged to hire a messenger to travel more than a 
thousand miles to serve a copy of the rule. At the ensuing court, 
affidavit was made of the service, and a motion to make the rule 
absolute. The scene immediately changed ; a new judge presided, 
and it was no longer the same court. 

The authority was called for, to grant such a rule : was it war- 
ranted by any act of congress, or by the practice of the state ? It 
was answered, There is no act of congress ; the state has no court 
of chancery. But this proceeding was instituted, and has been 
brought to its present stage, at considerable expense, under the di- 
rection of this court. The judge knew of no power the court 
had to direct the proceeding, and he did not consider, that the 
complainant could have a decree upon his bill, without going 
through the long train of process, found in the books of chancery 
practice. The complainant took this course, and, at a future time, 
was told by another judge, that he was incurring an unnecessary 
loss of time and money, and that a common rule would answer his 
purpose. 1 ask you, Mr. Chairman, if any system could be devis- 
ed more likely to produce vexation and delay ? Surely, sir, the 
law is uncertain enough in itself, and its paths sufficiently intricate 
and tedious, not to require, that your suitors should be burdened 
with additional embarrassments by the organization of your courts. 

The circuit is the principal court of civil and criminal business : 
the defects of this court were, therefore, most generally and sensi- 
bly felt. The high characters of the judges at first brought suitors 
into the courts, but the business was gradually declining, though 
causes belonging to the jurisdiction of the courts were multiply- 
ing ; the continual oscillation of the court baffled all conjecture as 
to the correct course of the proceeding, or the event of a cause. 
The law ceased to be a science. To advise your client, it was 
less important to be skilled in the books than to be acquainted 
with the character of the judge who was to preside. When the 
term approached, the inquiry was, What judge are we to have ? 
What is his character as a lawyer ? Is he acquainted with chan- 
cery law ? Is he a strict, common lawyer, or a special pleader ? 

When the character of the judge was ascertained, gentlemen 
would then consider the nature of their causes — determine whether 
it was more advisable to use means to postpone or to bring them 
lo a hearing. 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



171 



TLe talents of the judges rather increased the evil, than afforded 
a corrective for the vicious constitution of these courts. They 
had not drawn their knowledge from the same sources : their sys- 
tems were different, and hence the character of the court more 
essentially changed at each successive term. These difficulties 
and embarrassments banished suitors from the court, and without 
more than a common motive, recourse was seldom had to the 
federal tribunals. 

I have ever considered it, also, as a defect in this court, that it was 
composed of judges of the highest and lowest grades. This, sir, was 
an unnatural association ; the members of the court stood on ground 
too unequal to allow the firm assertion of his opinion to the district 
judge. Instead of being elevated, he felt himself degraded by a 
seat upon the bench of this court. In the district court he was every 
thing ; in the circuit court he was nothing. Sometimes he was oblig- 
ed to leave his seat, while his associate reviewed the judgment which 
he had given in the court below. In all cases, he was sensible, that 
the sentences in the court in which he was, were subject to the 
revision and control of a superior jurisdiction, where he had no in- 
fluence, but the authority of which was shared by the judge with 
whom he was acting. No doubt, in some instances, the district 
judge was an efficient member of this court ; but this never arose 
from the nature of the system, but from the personal character of 
the man. I have yet, Mr. Chairman, another fault to find with 
the ancient establishment of the circuit courts. They consisted 
only of two judges, and sometimes of one. The number was too 
small, considering the extent and importance of the jurisdiction of. 
the court. Will you remember, sir, that they hold the power of 
life and death, without appeal ? that these judgments were final 
over sums of two thousand dollars, and their original jurisdiction 
restrained by no limits of value ? and that this was the court to 
which appeals were carried from the district court ? 

I have often heard, sir, that in a multitude of counsel there was 
wisdom, and if the converse of the maxim be equally true, this 
court must have been very deficient. When we saw a single 
judge reversing the judgment of the district court, the objection 
was most striking ; but the court never had the weight which it 
ought to have possessed, and would have enjoyed, had it been 
composed of more members. 

But two judges belonging to the court, an inconvenience was 
sometimes felt from a division of their opinions. And this incon- 
venience was but poorly obviated by the provision of the law, that, 
in such cases, the cause should be continued to the succeeding 
term, and receive its decision from the opinion of the judge who 
should then preside. 

I do not pretend, Mr. Chairman, to have enumerated all tbfi 



172 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



defects which belonged to the former judicial system. But I 
trust, those which I have pointed out, in the minds of candid men, 
will justify the attempt of the legislature to revise that system, and 
to make a fairer experiment of that part of the plan of our con- 
stitution which regards the judicial power. The defects, sir, to 
which I have alluded, had been a long time felt and often spoken 
of. Remedies had frequently been proposed. I have known the 
subject brought forward in congress, or agitated in private, ever 
since I have had the honor of a seat upon this floor. 1 believe, 
sir, a great and just deference for the author of the ancient scheme 
prevented any innovation upon its material principles ; there was 
no gentleman who felt that deference more than myself, nor should 
I have ever hazarded a change upon speculative opinion. But 
practice had discovered defects which might well escape the most 
discerning mind in planning the theory. The original system 
could not be more than experiment : it was built upon no experi- 
ence. It was the first application of principles to a new stale of 
things. The first judicial law displays great ability, and it is no 
disparagement of the author, to say its plan is not perfect. 

I know, sir, that some have said, and perhaps not a few have 
believed, that the new system was introduced not so much with a 
view to its improvement of the old, as to the places which it pro- 
vided for the friends of the administration. This is a calumny so 
notoriously false, and so humble, as not to require nor to deserve 
an answer upon this floor. It cannot be supposed that the paltry 
object of providing for sixteen unknown men could have ever of- 
• fered an inducement to a great party basely to violate their duty ; 
meanly to sacrifice their character; and foolishly to forego all 
future hopes. 

I now come, Mr. Chairman, to examine the changes which were 
made by the late law. This subject has not been correctly under- 
stood. It has every where been erroneously represented. I have 
heard much said about the additional courts created by the act of 
last session. I perceive them spoken of in the president's mes- 
sage. In the face of this high authority, I undertake to state that 
no additional court was established by that law. Under the for- 
mer system there was one supreme court, and there is but one now. 
There were seventeen district courts, and there are no more now. 
There was a circuit court held in each district, and such is the case 
hi present. Some of the district judges are directed to hold their 
courts ai new places, but there is still in each district but one dis- 
trict court. What, sir, has been done ? The unnatural alliance 
between the supreme and district courts has been severed, but the 
jurisdiction of both those courts remains untouched. The power 
or authority of neither of them has been augmented or diminished. 
The jurisdiction of the circuit court has been extended to the cog- 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



173 



nizance of debts of four hundred dollars, and this is the only ma- 
terial change in the power of that court. The chief operation of 
the late law is a new organization of the circuit courts. To avoid 
the evils of the former plan, it became necessary to create a new 
corps of judges. It was considered that the supreme court ought 
to be stationary, and to have no connection with the judges over 
whose sentences they had an appellate jurisdiction. 

To have formed a circuit court out of the district judges would 
have allowed no court of appeal from the district court, except the 
supreme court, which would have been attended with great incon- 
venience. But this scheme was opposed by a still greater diffi- 
culty. In many districts the duties of the judge require a daily 
attention. In all of them business of great importance may, on 
unexpected occurrences, require his presence. 

This plan was thought of ; it was well examined, and finally re- 
jected in consequence of strong objections to which it was liable. 
Nothing therefore remained but to compose the circuit court of 
judges distinct from those of the other courts. Admitting the pro- 
priety of excluding frorn this court the judges of the supreme and 
district courts, I think the late congress cannot be accused of any 
wanton expense, nor even of a neglect of economy in the new es- 
tablishment. This extensive country has been divided into six 
circuits, and three judges appointed for each circuit. Most of the 
judges have twice a year to attend a court in three states, and 
there is not one of them who has not to travel further, and who, in 
time, will not have more labor to perform than any judge of the 
state courts. When we call to mind that the jurisdiction of this 
court reaches the life of the citizen, and that in civil cases its judg- 
ments are final to a large amount, certainly it will not be said that 
it ought to have been composed of less than three judges. One 
was surely not enough, and if it had been doubtful whether two 
were not sufficient, the inconvenience which would have frequently 
arisen from an equal division of opinion, justifies the provision which 
secures a determination in all cases. 

It was additionally very material to place on the bench of this 
court a judge from each state, as the court was in general bound to 
conform to the law and the practice of the several states. 

I trust, sir, the committee are satisfied that the number of judges 
which compose the circuit court is not too great, and that the le- 
gislature would have been extremely culpable to have committed 
the high powers of this court to fewer hands. Let me now ask, 
if the compensation allowed to these judges is extravagant. It is 
little more than half the allowance made to the judges of the su- 
preme court. It is but a small proportion of the ordinary practice 
of those gentlemen of the bar who are fit, and to whom we ought 
to look to fill the places. You have given a salary of two thousand 



174 



MR. BAYARDS SPEECH 



dollars. The puisne judges of Pennsylvania, I believe, have more 
When you deduct the expenses of the office, you will leave but a 
moderate compensation for service, but a scanty provision for a 
family. When, Mr. Chairman, gentlemen coolly consider the 
amendments of the late law, I flatter myself their candor will at 
least admit that the present modification was fairly designed to meet 
and remedy the evils of the old system. 

The supreme court has been rendered stationary. Men of age, 
of learning, and of experience, are now capable of holding a seat on 
the bench ; they Have time to mature their opinions in causes on 
which they are called to decide, and they have leisure to devote 
to their books, and to augment their store of knowledge. It was 
our hope, by the present establishment of the court, to render it the 
future pride, and honor, and safety of the nation. It is this tribu- 
nal which must stamp abroad the judicial character of our country. 
It is here that ambassadors and foreign agents resort for justice ; 
and it belongs to this high court to decide finally, not only on con- 
troversies of unlimited value between individuals, and on the more 
important collision of state pretensions, but also upon the validity 
of the laws of the state, and of this government. Will it be con- 
tended that such great trusts ought to be reposed in feeble or in- 
capable hands ? It has been asserted that this court will not have 
business to employ it. The assertion is supported neither by Avhat 
is past, nor by what is likely to happen. During the present ses- 
sion of congress, at their last term, the court was fully employed 
for two weeks in the daily hearing of causes. But its business 
must increase. There is no longer that restraint upon appeals 
from the circuit court, which was imposed by the authority of the 
judge of the court to which the appeal was to be carried ; no long- 
er will the apprehension of a secret unavoidable bias in favor of 
the decision of a member of their own body, shake the confidence 
of a suitor, in resorting to this court, who thinks that justice has not 
been done to him in the court below. The progressive increase 
of the wealth and population of the country will unavoidably swell 
the business of the court. But there is a more certain and unfail- 
ing source of employment which will arise in the appeals from the 
courts of the national territory. From the courts of original cog- 
nizance in this territory, it affords the only appellate jurisdiction. 
If gentlemen will look to the state of property of a vast amount 
in this city, they must be satisfied that the supreme court will have 
enough to do for the money which is paid them. 

Let us next consider, sir, the present state of the circuit courts. 

There are six courts which sit in twenty-two districts ; each 
court visits at least three districts ; some, four. The courts are now 
composed of three judges of equal power and dignity. Standing 
on equal ground, their opinions will be independent and firm. 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



175 



Their number is the best for consultation, and they are exempt 
from the inconvenience of an equal division of opinion. But what 
I value most, and what was designed to remedy the great defect 
of the former system, is the identity which the court maintains. 
Each district has now always the same court. Each district will 
hereafter have a system of practice and uniformity of decision. 
The judges of each circuit will now study, and learn, and retain the 
laws and practice of their respective districts. It never was intend- 
ed, nor is it practicable, that the same rule of property or of pro- 
ceeding should prevail from New Hampshire to Georgia. The old 
courts were enjoined to obey the laws of the respective states. 
Those laws fluctuate with the will of the state legislatures, and no 
other uniformity could ever be expected, but in the construction 
of the constitution and statutes of the United States. This uni- 
formity is still preserved by the control of the supreme court over 
the courts of the circuits. Under the present establishment, a ra- 
tional system of jurisprudence will arise. The practice and local 
laws of the different districts may vary, but in the same district 
they will be uniform. The practice of each district will suggest 
improvements to the others, the progressive adoption of which will, 
in time, assimilate the systems of the several districts. 

It is unnecessary, Mr. Chairman, for me to say any thing in 
relation to the district courts. Their former jurisdiction was not 
varied by the law of the last session. 

It has been my endeavor, sir, to give a correct idea of the 
defects of the former judicial plan, and of the remedies for those 
defects introduced by the law now designed to be repealed. I do 
not pretend to say that the present system is perfect ; I contend 
only that it is better than the old. If, sir, instead of destroying, 
gentlemen will undertake to improve the present plan, I will not 
only applaud their motives, but will assist in their labor. We ask 
only that our system may be tried. Let the sentence of experi- 
ence be pronounced upon it. Let us hear the national voice after 
it has been felt. They will then be better able to judge its 
merits. In practice it has not yet been complained of; and as it is 
designed for the benefit of the people, how can their friends justify 
the act of taking it from them before they have manifested their 
disposition to part with it ? 

How, sir, am 1 to account for the extreme anxiety to get rid of 
this establishment? Does it proceed from that spirit, which, since 
power has been given to it, has so unrelentingly persecuted men 
in office who belonged to a certain sect ? I hope there will be a 
little patience ; these judges are old and infirm men ; they will 
die ; they must die : wait but a short time, their places will be va- 
cant ; they will be filled with the disciples of the new school, and 



176 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



gentlemen will not have to answer for the political murder which is 

now meditated. 

I shall take the liberty now, sir, of paying some attention to the 
objections which have been expressed against the late establish- 
ment. An early exception, which, in the course of the debate, 
has been abandoned by most gentlemen, and little relied on by any 
one, is the additional expense. The gentleman from Virginia 
stated the expense of the present establishment at one hundred 
and thirty-seven thousand dollars. On this head the material 
question is, not what is the expense of the whole establishment, 
but what will be saved by the repealing law on the table. I do 
not estimate the saving at more than twenty-eight thousand five 
hundred dollars. You save nothing but the salaries of sixteen 
judges, of two thousand dollars each. From this amount is to be 
deducted the salary of a judge of the supreme court, w T hich is three 
thousand five hundred dollars. Abolishing the present system 
will not vary the incidental expenses of the circuit court. You 
revive a circuit court, whose incidental expenses wi] 1 be equal to 
those of the court you destroy. The increased salaries of the dis- 
trict judges of Kentucky and Tennessee must remain. It is not 
proposed to abolish their offices, and the admissions upon the other 
side allow that the salaries cannot be reduced. 

If there were no other objection, the present bill could not pass 
without amendment, because it reduces the salaries of those judges, 
which is a plain, undeniable infraction of the constitution. But, 
sir, it is not a fair way of treating the subject to speak of the ag- 
gregate expense. The great inquiry is, whether the judges are 
necessary, and whether the salaries allowed to them are reasonable. 
Admitting the utility of the judges, I think no gentleman will con- 
tend that the compensation is extravagant. 

We are told of the expense attending the federal judiciary. 
Can gentlemen tell me of a government under which justice is 
more cheaply administered ? Add together the salaries of all your 
judges, and the amount but little exceeds the emoluments of the 
chancellor of England. Ascertain the expenses of state justice, 
and the proportion of each state of the expense of federal justice, 
and you will find that the former is five times greater than the lat- 
ter. Do gentlemen expect that a system, expanded over the 
whole union, is to cost no more than the establishment of a single 
state ? Let it be remembered, sir, that the judiciary is an integral 
and coordinate part with the highest branches of the government. 
No government can long exist without an efficient judiciary. It is 
the judiciary which applies the law and enables the executive to 
carry it into effect. Leave your laws to the judiciaries of the 
states to execute, and my word for it, in ten years you have neither 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



177 



,aw nor constitution. Is your judiciary so costly that you will not 
support it ? Why, then, lay out so much money upon the other 
branches of your government ? I beg that it may be recollected 
that, if your judiciary costs you thousands of dollars, your legisla- 
ture costs you hundreds of thousands, and your executive millions. 

An objection has been derived from the paucity of causes in the 
federal courts, and the objection has been magnified by the alle- 
gation that the number had been annually decreasing. The facts 
admitted, 1 draw a very different inference from my opponents. 
In my opinion, they furnish the strongest proof of the defects of 
the former establishment, and of the necessity of a reform. I 
have no doubt, nay, I know it to be a fact, that many suitors w r ere 
diverted from those tribunals by the fluctuations to which they 
were subject. Allow me, however, to take some notice of the 
facts. They are founded upon the presidential document, No. 8. 
Taking the facts as there stated, they allow upwards of fifty suits 
annually for each court. When it is considered that these causes 
must each have erceeded the value of five hundred dollars, and 
that they were generally litigated cases, I do not conceive that 
there is much ground to affirm, that the courts were without busi- 
ness. But, sir, I must be excused for saying, I pay little respect 
to this document. It has been shown by others in several points 
to be erroneous, and from my own knowledge I know it to be in- 
correct. What right had the president to call upon the clerks to 
furnish him with the list of the suits which had been brought, or 
were depending in their respective courts ? Had this been direct- 
ed by congress, or was there any money appropriated to pay the 
expense ? Is there any law w T hich made it the duty of the clerks 
to obey the order of the executive ? Are the clerks responsible 
for refusing the lists, or for making false or defective returns ? Do 
we know any thing about the authenticity of the certificates made 
by the clerks ? And are we not now aiming a mortal blow at one 
branch of the government, upon the credit and at the instigation 
of another and a rival department ? Yes, sir, I say at the instiga- 
tion of the president ; for I consider this business wholly as a pres- 
idential measure. This document and his message show that it 
originated with him ; I consider it as now prosecuted by him, and 
I believe that be has the power to arrest its progress, or to accom- 
plish its completion. I repeat that it is his measure. I hold him 
responsible for it ; and I trust in God that the time will come when 
he will be called upon to answer for it as his act. And I trust the 
time will arrive, when he will hear us speaking upon the subject 
more effectually. 

It has been stated as the reproach, sir, of the bill of the last ses- 
sion, that it was made by a party at the moment when they were 
sensible that their power was expiring and passing into other hands 

Z 



173 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



It is enough for me that the full and legitimate power existed. 
The remnant was plenary and efficient. And it was our duty to 
employ it according to our judgments and consciences for the good 
of the country. We thought the bill a salutary measure, and there 
was no obligation upon us to leave it as a work for our successors. 
Nay, sir, I have no hesitation in avowing, that I had no confidence 
in the persons who were to follow us. And I was the more anx- 
ious, while we had the means, to accomplish a work which I be- 
lieved they would not do, and which 1 sincerely thought would 
contribute to the safety of the nation by giving strength and sup- 
port to the constitution through the storm to which it was likely to 
be exposed. The fears which I then felt have not been dispelled, 
but multiplied by what I have since seen. I know nothing which 
is to be allowed to stand. I observe the institutions of the gov- 
ernment falling around me ; and where the work of destruction is 
to end God alone knows. We discharged our consciences in es- 
tablishing a judicial system, which now exists, and it will be for 
those who now hold the power of the government to answer for 
the abolition of it, which they at present meditate. We are told 
that our law was against the sense of the nation. Let me tell 
those gentlemen they are deceived when they call themselves the 
nation. They are only a dominant party, and though the sun of 
■federalism should never rise again, they will shortly find men, bet- 
ter or worse than themselves, thrusting them out of their places. 
I know it is the cant of those in power, however they have ac- 
quired it, to call themselves the nation. We have recently wit- 
nessed an example of it abroad. How rapidly did the nation 
change in France ! At one time Brissot called himself the nation ; 
then Robespierre ; afterwards Tallien and Barras ; and finally Bo- 
naparte. But their dreams were soon dissipated, and they awoke 
in succession upon the scaffold or in banishment. Let not these 
gentlemen flatter themselves that Heaven has reserved to them a 
peculiar destiny. What has happened to others in this country, 
they must be liable to. Let them not exult too highly in the 
enjoyment of a little brief and fleeting authority. It was ours 
yesterday ; it is theirs to-day ; but to-morrow it may belong to 
others. 

[Mr. Bayard here observed, that as the common hour of ad- 
journment had gone by, he should take his seat in order to allow 
the committee to rise, if they thought proper. On the following 
day he resumed his argument.] 

I owe to the committee the expression of my thanks for the pa- 
tience with which they attended to the laborious discussion of yes- 
terday. 

It will be my endeavor, in the remarks which I have to offer 
upon the remaining point of the debate, to consume no time which 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



179 



the importance of the subject does not justify. I have never de- 
parted from the question before the committee, but with great re- 
luctance. Before I heard the gentleman from Virginia, I had not 
an observation to make unconnected with the bill on the table. It 
was he who forced me to wander on foreign ground ; and be as- 
sured, sir, I shall be guilty of no new digressions where I am not 
covered by the same justification. 

I did think that this was an occasion when the house ought to 
have been liberated from the dominion of party spirit, and allowed 
to decide upon the unbiased dictates of their understanding. The 
vain hope which I indulged, that this course would be pursued, 
was soon dissipated by the inflammatory appeal made by the gen- 
tleman from Virginia to the passions of his party. This appeal, 
which treated with no respect the feelings of one side of the house, 
will excuse recriminations which have been made, or which shall 
be retorted. We were disposed to conciliate ; but gentlemen are 
deceived if they think that we will submit to be trampled on. 

I shall now, sir, proceed to the consideration of the second point 
which the subject presents. However this point may be disguised 
by subtilties, I conceive the true question to be — Has the legisla- 
ture a right by law to remove a judge ? Gentlemen may state their 
question to be — Has the legislature a right by law to vacate the of- 
fice of a judge ? But, as in fact they remove the judges, they are 
bound to answer our question. 

The question which I state they will not meet. Nay, I have 
considered it as conceded upon all hands, that the legislature have 
not the power of removing a judge from his office ; but it is eon- 
tended only that the office may be taken from the judge. Sir, it 
is a principle in law which ought, and I apprehend does, hold more 
strongly in politics, that what is prohibited from being done direct- 
ly, is restrained from being done indirectly. Is there any differ- 
ence, but in words, between taking the office from a judge and re- 
moving a judge from the office ? Do you not indirectly accom- 
plish the end which you admit is prohibited? I will not say, that 
it is the sole intention of the supporters of the bill before us, to 
remove the circuit judges from their offices ; but I will say, that 
they establish a precedent which will enable worse men than 
themselves to make use of the legislative power, for that purpose, 
upon any occasion. If it be constitutional to vacate the office, and 
in that way to dismiss the judge, can there be a question as to the 
power to re-create the office and fill it with another man ? Re- 
peal to-day the bill of the last session, and the circuit judges are 
no longer in office. To-morrow rescind this repealing act (and 
no one will doubt the right to do it), and no effect is produced but 
the removal of the judges. To suppose that such a case may oc- 
cur is no vagary of imagination. The thing has been done, shame- 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



lessly done, in a neighboring state. The judges there held their 
offices upon the same tenure with the judges of the United States. 
Three of them were obnoxious to the men in power. The judicial 
law of the state was repealed, and immediately re-enacted, without 
a veil being thrown over the transaction. The obnoxious men 
were removed, their places supplied with new characters, and the 
other judges were re-appointed. Whatever sophistry may be able 
to show in theory, in practice there never will be found a differ- 
ence in the exercise of the powers of removing a judge and of va- 
cating his office. 

The question which we are now considering depends upon the 
provisions contained in the constitution. It is an error of the com- 
mittee, upon plain subjects to search for reasons very profound. 
Upon the present subject the strong provisions of the constitution 
are so obvious, that no eye can overlook them. They have been 
repeatedly cited, and as long as the question stated is under dis- 
cussion, they must be reiterated. There are two prominent pro- 
visions to which I now T particularly allude. First, the judges shall 
hold their offices during good behavior. Second, their compen- 
sation shall not be diminished during their continuance in office. 
These are provisions so clearly understood upon the first impres- 
sion, that their meaning is rather obscured than illustrated by argu- 
ment. What is meant and what has been universally understood 
by the tenure of " good behavior ? " A tenure for life, if the judge 
commit no misdemeanor. It is so understood and expressed in 
England, and so it has always been received and admitted in this 
country. The express provision, then, of the constitution, defines 
the tenure of a judge's office ; a tenure during life. How is that 
tenure expressly qualified ? By the good behavior of the judge. 
Is the tenure qualified by any other express condition or limitation ? 
No other. As the tenure is express, as but one express limitation 
is imposed upon it, can it be subject to any other limitation not de- 
rived from necessary implication ? If any material provision in the 
constitution can in no other manner be satisfied, than by subjecting 
the tenure of this office to some new condition, I will then admit 
that the tenure is subject to the condition. 

Gentlemen have ventured to point out a provision which they 
conceived furnished this necessary implication. They refer to 
the power given to congress from time to time to establish courts 
inferior to the supreme court. If this power cannot be exercised 
witnout vacating the offices of existing judges, I will concede that 
those offices may be vacated. But on this head there can be no 
controversy. The power has been, and at all times may be, ex- 
ercised, without vacating the office of any judge. It was so exer 
cised at the last session of congress ; and I surely do not now dis- 
pute the right of gentlemen to establish as many new courts as they 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



181 



may deem expedient. The power to establish new courts does 
not, therefore, necessarily imply a power to abolish the offices of 
existing judges, because the existence of those offices does not pre- 
vent an execution of the power. 

The clause in the constitution to which I have just alluded, has 
furnished to gentlemen their famous position, that, though you 
cannot remove a judge from his office, you may take the office 
from the judge. Though I should be in order, I will not call this 
a quibble, but I shall attempt, in the course of the argument, yet 
more clearly to prove that it is one. I do not contend that you 
cannot abolish an empty office ; but the point on which I rely is, 
that you can do no act which impairs the independence of a judge. 
When gentlemen assert that the office may be vacated, notwith- 
standing the incumbency of the judge, do they consider that they 
beg the very point which is in controversy ? The office cannot be 
vacated without violating the express provision of the constitution 
in relation to the tenure. 

The judge is to hold the office during good behavior. Does he 
hold it when it is taken from him ? Has the constitution said, that 
he shall hold the office during good behavior, unless congress shall 
deem it expedient to abolish the office ? If this limitation has 
been omitted, what authority have we to make it a part of the con- 
stitution ? 

The second plain, unequivocal provision on this subject is, that 
the compensation of the judge shall not be diminished during the 
time he continues in office. This provision is directly levelled at 
the power of the legislature. They alone could reduce the salary. 
Could this provision have any other design than to place the judge 
out of the power of congress ? And yet how imperfect and how 
absurd the plan ! You cannot reduce a part of the compensation ; 
but you may extinguish the whole. What is the sum of this no- 
table reasoning? You cannot remove a judge from the office ; but 
you may take the office from the judge. You cannot take the 
compensation from the judge ; but you may separate the judge 
from the compensation. 

If your constitution cannot resist reasoning like this, then indeed 
is it waste paper. 

I will here turn aside in order to consider a variety of arguments 
drawn from different sources, on which gentlemen on the other 
side have placed a reliance. I know of no order in which they 
can be classed, and I shall, therefore, take them up as I meet with 
them on my notes. It was urged by the honorable member from 
Virginia, to whom I have so frequently referred, that what was 
created by law might by law be annihilated. In the application 
of his principle he disclosed views which, I believe, have not been 
contemplated by gentlemen of his party. He was industrious to 
16 



182 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



show, that not only the inferior courts but the supreme court de- 
rives its existence from law. The president and legislature exist 
under the constitution. They came into being without the aid of 
a law. But though the constitution said there should be a su~ 
preme court, no judges could exist till the court was organized by 
a law. This argument, I presume, was pushed to this extent, in 
order to give notice to the judges of the supreme court of their 
fate, and to bid them prepare for their end. I shall not attempt 
to discriminate between the tenure of the offices of the judges of 
the supreme and inferior courts. Congress has power to organize 
both descriptions of courts, and to limit the number of judges ; but 
they have no power to limit or define the tenure of office. Con- 
gress creates the office ; the president appoints the officer ; but it 
is neither under congress nor the president, but under the consti- 
tution, that the judge claims to hold the office during good behavior. 
The principle asserted does not in this case apply ; the tenure of 
office is not created by law, and if the truth of the principle were 
admitted, it would not follow, that the tenure of the office might 
be vacated by law. But the principle is not sound. I will show 
a variety of cases which will prove its fallacy. Among the ob- 
noxious measures of the late administration, was the loan of five 
millions, which was funded at eight per centum. The loan was 
created by a law and funded by a law. Is the gentleman prepared 
to say, that this debt, which was funded by a law of the former le- 
gislature, may be extinguished by a law of the present ? Can you, 
by calling the interest of this debt exorbitant and usurious, justify 
the reduction of it ? Gentlemen admit that the salary of a judge, 
though established by a law, cannot be diminished by a law. The 
same thing must be allowed with respect to the salary of the pres- 
ident. Sir, the true principle is, that one legislature may repeal 
the act of a former, in cases not. prohibited by the constitution. 
The correct question therefore is, whether the legislature are not 
forbidden, by the constitution, to abridge the tenure of a judicial 
office. 

In order to avoid cases of a nature similar' to those which I have 
put, the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Davis), and after him the 
gentleman from Virginia, endeavored to draw a distinction between 
laws executed and laws executory. 

The distinction was illustrated by reference to the case of a state 
admitted by a law into the union. Here it is said the law is exe- 
cuted, and functus officio, and if you repeal it, still the state re- 
mains a member of the union. But it was asked by the gentle- 
man from Kentucky, Supposing a law made to admit a state into 
the union at a future time, before the time of admission arrived, 
could not the law be repealed ? I will answer the question to the 
-atisfaction of the gentleman by stating a case which exists. By 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



183 



an ordinance of congress, in the year 1787, congress ordained, 
that when the population within the limits of a state within the 
North Western Territory should amount to sixty thousand souls, 
the district should be admitted as a member of the union. Will 
the gentleman venture to doubt as to this case ? Would he dare 
to tell the people of this country, that congress had the power to 
disfranchise them ? 

The law, in the case I refer to, is executory, though the event 
upon which it is to take effect is limited by population, and not by 
time. 

But, sir, if there were any thing in the principle, it has no in- 
fluence upon the case to which it has been applied. A law has 
created the office of a judge ; the judge has been appointed, and 
the office filled. The law is therefore executed, and upon the 
very distinction of the gentleman, cannot be repealed. The law, 
fixing the compensation, is executory, and so is that which estab- 
lishes the salary of the president; but though executory, they can- 
not be repealed. The distinction, therefore, is idle, and leaves the 
question upon the ground of the repeal being permitted or pro- 
hibited by the constitution. I shall now advert, sir, to an argu- 
ment urged with great force, and not a little triumph, by the hon- 
orable member from Virginia. This argument is derived from the 
word ' hold," in the expression, the judge shall hold his office du- 
ring o-ood behavior. It is considered as correlative to tenure. The 
gentleman remarks, that the constitution provides, that the presi- 
dent shall nominate the judge to his office, and when approved by 
the senate, shall commission him. It is hence inferred, that as the 
president nominates and commissions the judge, the judge holds 
the office of the president ; and that when the constitution pro- 
vides, that the tenure of the office shall be during good behavior, 
the provision applies to the president, and restrains the power 
which otherwise would result in consequence of the offices being 
holden of him, to remove the judges at will. This is an argu- 
ment, sir, which I should have thought that honorable member 
would have been the last person upon this floor to have adopted. 
It not only imputes to the president royal attributes, but preroga- 
tives derived from the rude doctrines of the feudal law. Does 
the gentleman mean to contend, that the president of these states, 
like the monarch of England, is the fountain of honor, of justice, 
and of office ? Does he mean to contend, that the courts are the 
president's courts, and the judges the president's judges ? Does 
he mean to say, sir, that the chief magistrate is always supposed to 
be present in these courts, and that the judges are but the images 
of his justice ? To serve the paltry purposes of this argument, 
would the gentleman be willing to infuse into our constitution the 
vital spirit of the feudal doctrines ? He does not believe, he can 



184 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



not believe, that when the word c hold' was employed, any refer- 
ence was had to its feudal import. The language of the constitu- 
tion furnishes no support to this feudal argument. These officers 
are not called the judges of the president, but the judges of the 
United States. They are a branch of the government equally im- 
portant, and designed to be coordinate with the president. If, sir, 
because the president nominates to office, and commissions, the 
office is held of him ; for a stronger reason, where by patent he 
grants lands of the United States, the lands are held of him. And 
upon the grantee's dying without heirs, the lands would escheat 
not to the United States, but to the president. In England, the 
tenure of lands and offices is derived from the same principle. 
All lands are held mediately or immediately of the crown, because 
they are supposed to have been originally acquired from the per- 
sonal grant of the monarch. It is the same of office, as the king 
is supposed to be the source of all offices. Having the power to 
grant, he has a right to define the terms of the grant. These 
terms constitute the tenure. When the terms fail, the tenure 
ceases, and the object of the grant reverts to the grantor. This 
gentleman has charged others with monarchical tendencies ; but 
never have I before witnessed an attempt so bold and strong to 
incorporate in our constitution a rank monarchical principle. If, 
sir, the principle of our constitution on this subject be republican, 
and not monarchical, and the judges hold their offices of the 
United States, and not of the president, then the application of 
his argument has all the force against the gentleman, which he 
designed it should have against his adversaries. For if the office 
be held of the United States, and the tenure of good behavior was 
designed to restrain the power of those of whom the office was 
holden, it will follow T , that it was the intention to restrain the power 
of the United States. 

We have been told by gentlemen, that the principles w^e advo- 
cated tended to establish a sinecure system in the country. Sir, I am 
as little disposed to be accessory to the establishment of such a sys- 
tem, as any gentleman on this floor. But let me ask how this sys- 
tem is to be produced. We established judicial offices, to w T hich nu- 
merous and important duties were assigned. A compensation has 
been allow r ed to the judges, which no one will say is immoderate, 
or disproportioned to the service to be rendered. These gentlemen 
first abolish the duties of the offices, then call the judges pensioners, 
and afterwards accuse us of establishing sinecures. There are no 
pensioners at present ; if there should be any, they will be the 
creatures of this law. I have ever considered it as a sound and 
moral maxim, that no one should avail himself of his own wrong. 
It is a maxim, which ought to be equally obligatory upon the 
public as upon the private man. In the present case, the judge 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



185 



offers you his service. You cannot say it is not worth the money 
you pay for it. You refuse to accept the service ; and after en- 
gaging to pay him while he continued to perform the service, you 
deny him his compensation, because he neglects to render services 
which you have prevented him from performing. Was injustice 
ever more flagrant? Surely, sir, the judges are innocent. If we 
did wrong, why should they be punished and disgraced ? They 
did not pass the obnoxious law ; they did not create the offices ; 
they had no participation in the guilty business ; but they were 
invited, upon the faith of government, to renounce their private 
professions, to relinquish the emolument of other employments 
and to enter into the service of the United States, who en£a°;ed 
to retain them during their lives, if they were guilty of no mis- 
conduct. They have behaved themselves well, unexceptionably 
well, when they find the government rescinding the contract made 
with them, refusing the stipulated price of their labor, dismissing 
them from service, and, in order to cover the scandalous breach of 
faith, stigmatizing them with names wmich may render them odious 
to their countrymen. Is there a gentleman on the floor of this 
house, who would not revolt at such conduct in private life ? Is 
there one who w r ould feel himself justified, after employing a per- 
son for a certain time, and agreeing to pay a certain compensation, 
to dismiss the party from the service upon any caprice which alter- 
ed his views, deny him the stipulated compensation, and abuse 
him with opprobrious names, for expecting the benefit of the en 
gagement ? 

A bold attempt was made, by one of the gentlemen from Vir 
ginia (Mr. Giles), to force to his aid the statute of 13th Wm. III. 
I call it a bold attempt, because the gentleman was obliged to rely 
upon his own assertion to support the ground of his argument - 
He stated, that the clause in the constitution was borrowed from a 
similar provision in the statute. I know nothing about the fact, 
but I will allow the gentleman its full benefit. In England, at an 
earlier period, the judges held their commissions during the good 
pleasure of the monarch. The parliament desired, and the king 
consented, that the royal prerogative should be restrained ; that 
the offices of the judges should not depend on the will of the 
crown alone, but upon the joint pleasure of the crown and of par- 
liament. The king consented to part with a portion of his prerog- 
ative by relinquishing his power to remove the judges without the 
advice of his parliament. But, by an express clause in the statute, 
he retained the authority to remove them by the advice of his par- 
liament. Suppose the clause had been omitted, which reserved 
the right to remove upon the address of the two houses of parlia- 
ment, and the statute had been worded in the unqualified language 
of our constitution, that the judges should hold their offices durng 
16 * A a 



186 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



good behavior ; would not the prerogative of removal have been 
abolished altogether ? I will not say that the honorable member 
has been peculiarly unfortunate in the employment of this argu- 
ment, because, sir, it appears to me, that most to which he has 
had recourse, when justly considered, have operated against the 
cause they were designed to support. 

The gentleman tells us, that the constitutional provision on this 
subject was taken from the statute of William. Will he answer 
me this plain question — Why do we find omitted in the constitu- 
tion that part of the statutory provision, which allowed the judges 
to be removed upon the address of the two branches of the legis- 
lature ? Does he suppose that the clause was not observed ? 
Does he imagine that the provision was dropped through inadver- 
tency? Will he impute so gross a neglect to an instrument, every 
sentence, and word, and comma of which, he has told us, was so 
maturely considered, and so warily settled ? No, sir, it is impossi- 
ble ; and give me leave to say, that if this part of the constitution 
were taken from the statute (and the gentleman from Virginia 
must have better information on the subject than I have), that a 
stronger argument could not be adduced, to show that it was the 
intention of those who framed the constitution, by omitting that 
clause in the statute which made the judges tenants of their office 
at the will of parliament, to improve in this country the English 
plan of judicature, by rendering the judges independent of the 
legislature. And I shall have occasion, in the course of my obser- 
vations, to show, that the strongest reasons derived from the nature 
of our government, and which do not apply to the English form, 
require the improvements to be made. 

Upon this point, sir, we may borrow a few additional rays of 
light from the constitutions of Pennsylvania, of Delaware, and of 
some other states. In those states it has been thought, that there 
might be misconduct on the part of a judge, not amounting to an 
impeachable offence, for which he should be liable to be removed. 
Their constitutions, therefore, have varied from that of the United 
States, and rendered their judges liable to be removed upon the 
address of two thirds of each branch of the legislature. Does it 
not strike every mind, that it was the intention of those constitu- 
tions to have judges independent of a majority of each branch of 
the legislature ? and I apprehend, also, that it may be fairly infer- 
red, that it was understood in those states, when their constitutions 
were formed, that even two thirds of each branch of the legisla- 
ture would not have the power to remove a judge, whose tenure 
of office was during good behavior, unless the power was express- 
ly given to them by the constitution. I cannot well conceive of 
any thing more absurd, in an instrument designed to last for cen- 
turies, and to bind the furious passions of party, than to fortify one 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



187 



pass to judicial independence, and to leave another totally un- 
guarded against the violence of legislative power. 

It has been urged, by the gentleman from Virginia, that our ad- 
mission, that congress has a power to modify the office of a judge, 
leads to the conclusion, that they have the power to abolish the 
office ; because, by paring away their powers, they may at length 
reduce them to a shadow, and leave them as humble and as con- 
temptible as a court of piepoudre. The office of a judge consists 
of judicial powers which he is appointed to execute. Every law 
which is passed increases or diminishes those powders, and so far 
modifies the office ; nay, it is competent for the legislature to pre- 
scribe additional duties or to dispense with unnecessary services, 
which are connected with the office of judge. But this power 
has its bounds. You may modify the office to any extent which 
does not affect the independence of the judge. The judge is to 
hold the office during good behavior ; now modify as you please, 
so that you do not infringe this constitutional provision. 

Do you ask me to draw a line, and say, Thus far you shall go, 
and no further? 1 admit no line can be drawn. It is an affair 
of sound and bona fide discretion. Because a discretion on the 
subject is given to the legislature, to argue upon the abuse of that 
discretion, is adopting a principle subversive of all legitimate 
power. 

The constitution is predicated upon the existence of a certain 
degree of integrity in man. It has trusted powers liable to enor- 
mous abuse, if all political honesty be discarded. The legislature 
is not limited in the amount of the taxes which they have a right 
to impose, nor as to the objects to which they are to be applied. 
Does this power give us the property of the country,* because by 
taxes we might draw it into the public coffers, and then cut up the 
treasury and divide the spoils ? Is there any power, in respect to 
which a precise line can be drawn, between the discreet exercise 
and the abuse of it ? 

I can only say, therefore, on this subject, that every man is ac- 
quitted to his own conscience, who bona fide does not intend, and 
who sincerely does not believe, that by the law which he is about 
to pass, he interferes with the judges holding their offices during 
good behavior. 

I am now brought, Mr. Chairman, to take notice of some re- 
marks which fell from the gentleman from Virginia, which do 
not belong to the subject before us, but are of . sufficient impor- 
tance to deserve particular attention. He called Our attention, in a 
very impressive manner, to the state of parties in this house, at 
the time when the act of the last session passed. He describes 
us in a state of blind paroxysm, incapable of discerning the nature 
or tendency of the measures we were pursuing ; that a majority 



188 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



of the house were struggling to counteract the expression of the 
public will in relation to the person who was to be the chief magis- 
trate of the country. 

I did suppose, sir, that this business was at an end ; and I did 
imagine, that as gentlemen had accomplished their object, they 
would have been satisfied. But as the subject is again renewed, 
we must be allowed to justify our conduct. I know not what the 
gentleman calls an expression of the public will. There were two 
candidates for the office of president, who were presented to the 
house of .representatives with equal suffrages. The constitution 
gave us the right, and made it our duty, to elect that one of the 
two whom we thought preferable. A public man is to notice the 
public will as constitutionally expressed. The gentleman from 
Virginia, and many others, may have had their preference ; but 
that preference of the public will did not appear by its constitu- 
tional expression. Sir, 1 am not certain that either of those can- 
didates had a majority of the country in his favor. Excluding the 
state of South Carolina, the country was equally divided. We 
know that parties in that state were nearly equally balanced, and 
the claims of both the candidates were supported by no othei 
scrutiny into the public will, than our official return of votes. 
Those votes are very imperfect evidence of the true will of 
a majority of the nation. They resulted from political intrigue and 
artificial arrangements. 

When we look at the votes, we must suppose that every man in 
Virginia voted the same way. These votes are received as a cor- 
rect expression of the public will. And yet we know, that if the 
votes of that state were apportioned according to the several voices 
of the people, that at least seven out of twenty-one would have 
been opposed to the successful candidates. It was the suppression 
of the will of one third of Virginia, which enables gentlemen now 
to say, that the present chief magistrate is the man of the people. 
1 consider that as the public will which is expressed by constitu- 
tional organs. To that will I bow and submit. The public will, 
thus manifested, gave to the house of representatives the choice 
of the two men for president. Neither of them was the man 
whom 1 wished to make president : but my election was confined 
by the constitution to one of the two, and I gave my vote to the 
one whom I thought was the greater and better man. That vote 
1 repeated, and in that vote I should have persisted, had I not 
been driven from it by imperious necessity. The prospect ceased 
of the vote being effectual, and the alternative only remained of 
taking one man for president, or having no president at all. I 
chose, as I then thought, the lesser evil. 

From the scene in this house, the gentleman carried us to one 
in the senate. I should blush, sir, for the honor of the country, 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



189 



could I suppose that the law, designed to be repealed, owed its 
support in that body to the motives which have been indicated. 
The charge designed to be conveyed, not only deeply implicates 
the integrity of individuals of the senate, but of the person who 
was then the chief magistrate. The gentleman, going beyond all 
precedent, has mentioned the names of members of that body, to 
whom commissions issued for offices not created by the bill before 
them, but which that bill, by the promotions it afforded, was like- 
ly to render vacant. He has considered the scandal of the trans- 
action as aggravated by the issuing of commissions for offices not 
actually vacant, upon the bare presumption that they would be- 
come vacant, by the incumbents accepting commissions for higher 
offices which were isused in their favor. The gentleman has par- 
ticularly dwelt upon the indecent appearance of the business, from 
two commissions being held by different persons at the same time 
for the same office. 

I beg that it will be understood, that I mean to give no opinion 
as to the regularity of granting a commission for a judicial office, 
upon the probability of a vacancy before it is actually vacant ; but 
I shall be allowed to say, that so much doubt attends the point, 
that an innocent mistake might be made on the subject. I be- 
lieve, sir, it has been the practice to consider the acceptance of an 
office as relating to the date of the commission. The officer is 
allowed his salary from that date, upon the principle that the com- 
mission is a grant of the office, and the title commences with the 
date of the grant. This principle is certainly liable to abuse ; but 
where there was a suspicion of abuse, I presume the government 
would depart from it. Admitting the office to pass by the com- 
mission, and the acceptance to relate to its date, it then does not 
appear very incorrect, in the case of a commission for the office 
of a circuit judge, granted to a district judge, as the acceptance of 
the commission for the former office relates to the date of the 
commission, to consider the latter office as vacant from the same 
time. The offices are incompatible. You cannot suppose the 
same person in both offices at the same time. From the moment, 
therefore, that you consider the office of circuit judge as filled by 
a person who holds the commission of district judge, you must 
consider the office of district judge as vacated. The grant is con- 
tingent. If the contingency happen, the office vests from the 
date of the commission ; if the contingency does not happen, the 
grant is void. If this reasoning be sound, it was not irregular, in 
the late administration, after granting a commission to a dis- 
trict judge, for the place of a circuit judge, to make a grant of the 
office of the district judge, upon the contingency of his accepting 
the office of the circuit judge. 

I now return, sir, to that point of the charge which was person 



190 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



al in its nature, and of infinitely the most serious import. It is a 
charge, as to which we can only ask, is it true ? If it be true, it 
cannot be excused ; it cannot be palliated ; it is vile, profligate cor- 
ruption, which every honest mind will execrate. But, sir, we are 
not to condemn till we have evidence of the fact. If the offence 
be serious, the proof ought to be plenary. I will consider ihe 
evidence of the fact upon which the honorable member has relied, 
and I will show him, by the application of it to a stronger case, 
that it is of a nature to prove nothing. 

Let me first state the principal case. Two gentlemen of ihe 
senate, Mr. Read, of South Carolina, and Mr. Green, of Rhode 
Island, who voted in favor of the law of last session, each receiv- 
ed an appointment to the place of district judge, which was de- 
signed to be vacated by the promotion of the district judge to the 
office of circuit judge. The gentleman conveyed to us a distinct 
impression of his opinion, that there was an understanding between 
these gentlemen and the president, and that the offices were the 
promised price of their votes. 

I presume, sir, the gentleman will have more charity in the case 
which I am about to mention, and he will for once admit, that 
public men ought not to be condemned, upon loose conclusions 
drawn from equivocal presumptions. 

The case, sir, to which I refer, carries me once more to the scene 
of the presidential election. I should not have introduced it into 
this debate, had it not been called up by the honorable member 
from Virginia. In that scene I had my part ; it was a part not 
barren of incident, and which has left an impression which cannot 
easily depart from my recollection. I know who were rendered 
important characters, either from the possession of personal means, 
or from the accident of political situation. And now, sir, let me 
ask the honorable member, what his reflections and belief will be, 
when he observes, that every man, on whose vote the event of the 
election hung, has since been distinguished by presidential favor. 
I fear, sir, I shall violate the decorum of parliamentary proceeding, 
in the mentioning of names ; but I hope the example which has 
been set me will be admitted as an excuse. Mr. Charles Pinck- 
ney, of South Carolina, was not a member of the house ; but he 
was one of the most active, efficient and successful promoters of 
the election of the present chief magistrate. It was well ascer- 
tained, that the votes of South Carolina were to turn the equal 
balance of the scales. The zeal and industry of Mr. Pinckney 
had no bounds. The doubtful politics of South Carolina were de- 
cided, and her votes cast into the scale of Mr. Jefferson. Mr. 
Pinckney has since been appointed minister plenipotentiary to the 
court of Madrid ; an appointment as high and honorable as any 
within, the gift of the executive. I will not deny, that this prefer- 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



191 



ment is the reward of talents and services, although, sir, I have 
never yet heard of the talents or services of Mr. Charles Pinck- 
ney. In the house of representatives, I know what was the value 
of the vote of Mr. Claiborne, of Tennessee. The vote of a state 
was in his hands. Mr. Claiborne has since been raised to the 
high dignity of governor of the Mississippi Territory. 1 know 
how great, and how greatly felt, was the importance of the vote 
of Mr. Linn, of New Jersey. The delegation of the state con 
sists of five members. Two of the delegation were decidedly for 
Mr. Jefferson ; two were decidedly for Mr. Burr. Mr. Linn was 
considered as inclining to one side, but still doubtful. Both parties 
looked up to him for the vote of New Jersey. He gave it to Mr. 
Jefferson ; and Mr. Linn has since had the profitable office of su- 
pervisor of his district conferred upon him. Mr. Lyon, of Ver- 
mont, was, in this instance, an important man. He neutralized 
the vote of Vermont. His absence alone would have given the 
vote of a state to Mr. Burr. It was too much to give an office to 
Mr. Lyon : his character was low. But Mr. Lyon's son has been 
handsomely provided for in one of the executive offices. 1 shall 
add to the catalogue but the name of one more gentleman, Mr. 
Edward Livingston, of New York. I knew well, full well I knew, 
the consequence of this gentleman. His means were not limited 
to his own vote ; nay, I always considered more than the vote of 
New York within his power. Mr. Livingston has been made the 
attorney for the district of NewYork : the road of preferment has 
been opened to him, and his brother has been raised to the distin- 
guished place of minister plenipotentiary to the French republic. 

This catalogue might be swelled to a much greater magnitude : 
but I fear, Mr. Chairman t were I to proceed further, it might be 
supposed, that I myself harbored the uncharitable suspicions of the 
integrity of the chief magistrate, and of the purity of the gentle- 
men whom he thought proper to promote, which it is my desigc 
alone to banish from the mind of the honorable member from Vir- 
ginia. It would be doing me great injustice to suppose, that I 
have the smallest desire, or have had the remotest intention, to 
tarnish the fame of the present chief magistrate, or of any of the 
honorable gentlemen who have been the objects of his favor, by 
the statement which I have made : my motive is of an opposite 
nature. The late president appointed gentlemen to office to whom 
he owed no personal obligations, but who only supported what has 
been considered as a favorite measure. This has been assumed as 
a sufficient ground, not only of suspicion, but of condemnation. 
The present executive, leaving scarcely an exception, has appoint- 
ed to office, or has, by accident, indirectly gratified every man who 
had any distinguished means in the competition for the presidential 



192 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



office, of deciding the election in his favor. Yet, sir, all this fur 
nishes too feeble a presumption to warrant me to express a sus- 
picion of the integrity of a great officer, or of the probity- of hon- 
orable men, in the discharge of the high functions which they had 
derived from the confidence of their country. I am sure, sir, in 
this case, the honorable member from Virginia is as exempt from 
any suspicion as myself. And I shall have accomplished my 
whole object, if 1 induce that honorable member, and other mem- 
bers of the committee, who entertain his suspicions as to the con- 
duct of the late executive, to review the ground of those suspicions, 
and to consider, that in a case furnishing much stronger ground for 
the presumption of criminality, they have an unshaken belief, an 
unbroken confidence, in the purity and fairness of the executive 
conduct. 

1 return again to the subject before the committee, from the 
unpleasant digression to which I was forced to submit, in order to 
repel insinuations which were calculated to have the worst effect, 
as well abroad as within the walls of this house. I shall now 
cursorily advert to some arguments of minor importance, which 
are supposed to have some weight by gentlemen on the other side. 
It is said, that if the courts are sanctuaries, and the judges cannot 
be removed by law, it would be in the power of a party to create 
a host of them, to live as pensioners on the country. This argu- 
ment is predicated upon an extreme abuse of power, which can 
never fairly be urged to restrain the legitimate exercise of it : as 
well might it be urged, that a subsequent congress had a right to 
reduce the salary of a judge, or of the president, fixed by a for- 
mer congress ; because, if the right did not exist, one congress 
might confer a salary of five hundred, thousand, or a million of 
dollars, to the impoverishment of the country. It will be time 
enough to decide upon those extreme cases, when they occur. 
'We are told, that the doctrine we contend for enables one legis 
lature to derogate from the power of another ; that it attributes 
to a former a power which it denies to a subsequent legislature. 

This is not correct. We admit, that this congress possesses all 
the power possessed by the last congress. That congress had a 
power to establish courts ; so has the present. That congress had 
not, nor did it claim, the power to abolish the office of a judge 
while it was rilled. Though they thought five judges, under the 
new system, sufficient to constitute the supreme court, they did 
not attempt to touch the office of either of the six judges. 
Though they considered it more convenient to have circuit judges 
in Kentucky and Tennessee than district judges, they did not lay 
their hands upon the offices of the six judges. We, therefore, 
deny no power to this congress which was not denied to the last. 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



193 



An honorable member from Virginia seriously expressed his alarm, 
lest the principles we contended for should introduce into the 
country a privileged order of men. The idea of the gentleman 
supposes that every office not at will, establishes a privileged 
order. The judges have their offices for one term ; the president, 
the senators and members of this house, for different terms. 
While these terms endure, there is a privilege to hold the places, 
and no power exists to remove. If this be what the gentleman 
means by a privileged order, and he agrees that the president, the 
senators and the members of this house, belong to privileged 
orders, I shall give myself no trouble to deny, that the judges fall 
under the same description ; and I believe that the gentleman will 
find it difficult to show, that in any other manner they are privi- 
leged. I did not suppose that this argument was so much ad- 
dressed to the understandings of gentlemen upon this floor, as to 
the prejudices and passions of people out of doors. 

It was urged with some impression, by the honorable member 
from Virginia, to whom I last referred, that the position, that the 
office of a judge might be taken from him by law, was not a new 
doctrine ; that it was established by the very act now designed 
to be repealed, which was described, in glowing language, to have 
inflicted a gaping wound on the constitution, and to have stained 
with its blood the pages of our statute-book. It shall be my task, 
sir, to close this gaping wound, and to wash from the pages of 
our statute-book the blood with which they were stained. It 
will be an easy task to show to you the constitution without a 
wound, and the statute-book without a stain. 

It is, sir, the twenty-seventh section of the bill of the last ses- 
sion, which the honorable member considers as having inflicted 
the ghastly wound on the constitution, of which he has so feeling- 
ly spoken. That section abolishes the ancient circuit courts. 
But, sir, have we contended, or has the gentleman shown, that 
the constitution prohibits the abolition of a court, when you do 
not materially affect, or in any degree impair the independence of 
a judge ? A court is nothing more than a place where a judge is 
directed to discharge certain duties. There is no doubt you may 
erect a new court, and direct it to be holden by the judges of the 
supreme or of the district courts. And if it should afterwards be 
your pleasure to abolish. that court, it cannot be said, that you de- 
stroy the offices of the judges by whom it was appointed that the 
courts should be holden. 

Thus it was directed by the original judicial law, that a circuit 
court should be holden at Yorktown, in the district of Pennsyl- 
vania. This court was afterwards abolished ; but it was nevei 
imagined that the office of any judge was affected. Let me sup- 
pose that a state is divided into two districts, and district courts- 
17 B b 



194 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



established in each, but that one judge is appointed by law to dis- 
charge the judicial duties in both courts. The arrangement is 
afterwards found inconvenient, and one of the courts is abolished. 
In this case, will it be said, that the office of the judge is destroy- 
ed, or his independence affected? The error into which gentle- 
men have fallen on this subject, has arisen from their taking for 
granted w T hat they have not attempted to prove, and what cannot be 
supported — that the office of a judge, and any court in which he 
officiates, are the same thing. It is most clear, that a judge may 
be authorized and directed to perform duties in several courts, and 
that the discharging him from the performance of duty in one of 
those courts, cannot be deemed an infringement of his office. 
The case of the late circuit courts as plainly illustrates the argu- 
ment, and as conclusively demonstrates its correctness, as any case 
which can be put. There w 7 ere not nominally any judges of the 
circuit court. The court w r as directed to be holden by the judges 
of the supreme and of the district courts. The judges of these two 
courts were associated and directed to perform certain duties ; when 
associated, and in the performance of those duties, they were denom- 
inated the circuit court. This court is abolished ; the only conse- 
quence is, that the judges of the supreme and district courts are dis- 
charged from the performance of the joint duties which were previ- 
ously imposed upon them. But is the office of one judge of the 
supreme or of the district courts infringed? Can any judge say, in 
consequence of the abolition of the circuit courts, I no longer hold 
my office during good behavior ? On this point, it w r as further 
alleged by the same honorable member, that the law of the last 
session inflicted another wound on the constitution, by abolishing 
the district courts of Kentucky and Tennessee. The gentleman 
was here deceived by the same fallacy w 7 hich misled him on the 
subject of the circuit courts. If he will give himself the trouble 
of carefully reviewing the provisions of the law, he will discern 
the sedulous attention of the legislature to avoid the infringement 
of the offices of those judges. I believe the gentleman went so 
far as to charge us with appointing by law those judges to new 
offices. 

The law referred to establishes a circuit comprehending Ken- 
tucky, Tennessee, and the district of Ohio. The duties of the 
court of this circuit are directed to be performed by a circuit judge 
and the two district judges of Kentucky and Tennessee. Surely 
it is competent for the legislature to create a court, and to direc 
that it shall be holden by any of the existing judges. If the legisla 
ture had done, with respect to all the district judges, what they hav< 
done with respect to those of Kentucky and Tennessee, I am quite 
certain that the present objection would have appeared entirety 
groundless. Had they directed that all the circuit courts shoulc 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



195 



be held by the respective judges within the circuits, gentlemen 
would have clearly seen, that this was only an imposition of a 
new duty, and not an appointment to a new office. 

It will be recollected that, under the old establishment, the dis- 
trict judges of Kentucky and Tennessee were invested generally 
with the powers of the circuit judges. The ancient powers of 
those judges are scarcely varied by the late law, and the amount 
of the change is, that they are directed to exercise those powers 
in a court formerly called a district, but now a circuit court, and at 
other places than those to which they were formerly confined. But 
the district judge nominally remains ; his office both nominally and 
substantially exists, and he holds it now, as he did before, during 
good behavior. I will refer gentlemen to different provisions in 
the late law, which will show, beyond denial, that the legislature 
carefully and pointedly avoided the act of abolishing the offices of 
those judges. 

The seventh section of the law provides, that the court of the 
sixth circuit shall be composed of a circuit judge, " and the judges 
of the district courts of Kentucky and Tennessee." It is after- 
wards declared, in the same section, "that there shall be appoint- 
ed, in the sixth circuit, a judge of the United States, to be called 
a circuit judge, who, together with the district judges of Tennessee 
and Kentucky, shall hold the circuit courts hereby directed to be 
holden within the same circuit." And finally, in the same section, 
it is provided, " that whenever the office of district judge in the 
districts of Kentucky and Tennessee respectively shall become 
vacant, such vacancies shall respectively be supplied by the ap- 
pointment of two additional circuit judges in the said circuit, who, 
together with the circuit judge first aforesaid, shall compose the 
circuit court of the said circuit." When the express language of 
the law affirms the existence of the office and of the officer, by 
providing for the contingency of the officer ceasing to fill the of- 
fice, with what face can gentlemen contend that the office is abol- 
ished ? They who are not satisfied upon this point, I despair of 
convincing upon any other. 

Upon the main question, whether the judges hold their offices 
at the will of the legislature, an argument of great weight, and 
according to my humble judgment, of irresistible force, still 
remains. 

The legislative power of the government is not absolute, but 
limited. If it be doubtful whether the legislature can do what the 
constitution does not explicitly authorize, yet there can be no 
question, that they cannot do what the constitution expressly pro- 
hibits. To maintain, therefore, the constitution, the judges are a 
check upon the legislature. The doctrine, 1 know, is denied, and 
it is, therefore, incumbent upon me to show that it is sound. 



196 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



It was once thought by gentlemen, who now deny the princi- 
ple, that the safety of the citizen and of the states rested upon the 
power of the judges to declare an unconstitutional law void. How 
vain is a paper restriction if it confers neither power nor right ! 
Of what importance is it to say, congress are prohibited from doing 
certain acts, if no legitimate authority exists in the country to de- 
cide whether an act done is a prohibited act ? Do gentlemen per- 
ceive the consequences which would follow from establishing the 
principle, that congress have the exclusive right to decide upon 
their own powers ? This principle admitted, does any constitution 
remain ? Does not the power of the legislature become absolute 
and omnipotent ? Can you talk to them of transgressing their 
powers, when no one has a right to judge of those powers but 
themselves ? They do what is not authorized; they do what is in- 
hibited ; nay, at every step, they trample the constitution under 
foot ; yet their acts are lawful and binding, and it is treason to re- 
sist them. How ill, sir, do the doctrines and professions of these 
gentlemen agree ! They tell us they are friendly to the existence 
of the states ; that they are the friends of federative, but the ene- 
mies of a consolidated general government ; and yet, sir, to accom- 
plish a paltry object, they are willing to settle a principle which, 
beyond all doubt, would eventually plant a consolidated govern- 
ment, with unlimited power, upon the ruins of the state gov- 
ernments. 

Nothing can be more absurd than to contend, that there is a 
practical restraint upon a political body, who are answerable to 
none but themselves for the violation of the restraint, and who can 
derive, from the very act of violation, undeniable justification of 
their conduct. 

If, Mr. Chairman, you mean to have a constitution, you must 
discover a power to which the acknowledged right is attached of 
pronouncing the invalidity of the acts of the legislature which con- 
travened the instrument. 

Does the power reside in the states ? Has the legislature of a 
state a right to declare an act of congress void? This would be 
erring upon the opposite extreme. It would be placing the gener- 
al government at the feet of the state governments. It would be 
allowing one member of the union to control all the rest. It 
would inevitably lead to civil dissension and a dissolution of the 
general government. Will it be pretended, that the state courts 
have the exclusive right of deciding upon the validity of our laws ? 

I admit they have the right to declare an act of congress void. 
But this right they enjoy in practice, and it ever essentially must 
exist, subject to the revision and control of the courts of the 
jJnited States. If the state courts definitively possessed the right 
of declaring the invalidity of the laws of this government, it would 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



197 



bring us in subjection to the states. The judges of those courts, 
being bound by the laws of the state, if a state declared an act of 
congress unconstitutional, the law of the state would oblige its 
courts to determine the law invalid. This principle would also 
destroy the uniformity of obligation upon all the states, which 
should attend every Jaw of this government. If a law were de- 
clared void in one state, it would exempt the citizens of that state 
from its operation, whilst obedience was yielded to it in the other 
states. I go further, and say, if the states or state courts had a 
final power of annulling the acts of this government, its miserable 
and precarious existence would not be worth the trouble of a mo- 
ment to preserve. 

It would endure but a short time as a subject of derision, and, 
wasting into an empty shadow, would quickly vanish from our 
sight. Let me now ask if the power to decide upon the validity 
of our laws resides with the people. Gentlemen cannot deny this 
right to the people. I admit they possess it. But if, at the same 
time, it does not belong to the courts of the United States, where 
does it lead the people ? It leads them to the gallows. Let us 
suppose that congress, forgetful of the limits of their authority, pass 
an unconstitutional law. They lay a direct tax upon one state, and 
impose none upon the others. The people of the state taxed con- 
test the validity of the law. They forcibly resist its execution. 
They are brought by the executive authority before the courts 
upon charges of treason. The law is unconstitutional ; the people 
have done right ; but the court are bound by the law, and obliged 
to pronounce upon them the sentence which it inflicts. Deny tt 
the courts of the United States the power of judging upon the con- 
stitutionality of our laws, and it is vain to talk of its existing else- 
where. The infractors of the laws are brought before these courts, 
and if the courts are implicitly bound, the invalidity of the laws 
can be no defence. There is, however, Mr. Chairman, still a 
stronger ground of argument upon this subject. I shall select one 
or two cases to illustrate it. Congress are prohibited from passing 
a bill of attainder ; it is also declared in the constitution, that " no 
attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood or forfeiture, ex- 
cept during the life of the party attainted." Let us suppose that 
Congress pass a bill of attainder, or they enact, that any one at- 
tainted of treason shall forfeit to the use of the Lmited States, all 
the estate which he held in any lands or tenements. 

The party attainted is seized and brought before a federal court, 
and an award of execution passed against him. He opens the 
'constitution, and points to this line, " No bill of attainder or ex post 
facto law shall be passed." The attorney for the United States 
reads the bill of attainder. 

17* 



193 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



The court are bound to decide ; but they have only the alterna- 
tive of pronouncing the law or the constitution invalid. It is left 
to them only to say, that the law vacates the constitution, or the 
constitution avoids the law. So, in the other case stated, the heir, 
after the death of his ancestor, brings his ejectment in one of the 
courts of the United States to recover his inheritance. The law 
by which it is confiscated is shown. The constitution gave no 
power to pass such a law. On the contrary, it expressly denied 
it to the government. The title of the heir is rested on the con- 
stitution, the title of the government oil the law. The effect of 
one destroys the effect of the other ; the court must determine 
which is effectual. 

There are many other cases, Mr. Chairman, of a similar nature 
to which 1 might allude. There is the case of the privilege of 
habeas corpus, which cannot be suspended but in times of rebellion 
or of invasion. Suppose a law prohibiting the issuing of the writ 
at a moment of profound peace. If, in such case, the writ were 
demanded of a court, could they say, It is true the legislature were 
restrained from passing the law suspending the privilege of this 
writ, at such a time as that which now exists ; but their mighty 
power has broken the bonds of the constitution, and fettered the 
authority of the court ? I am not, sir, disposed to vaunt ; but, 
standing on this ground, I throw the gauntlet to any champion 
upon the other side. I call upon them to maintain, that in a col- 
lision between a law and the constitution, the judges are bound to 
support the law and annul the constitution. Can the gentlemen 
relieve themselves from this dilemma ? Will they say, though a 
judge has no power to pronounce a law void, he has a power to 
declare the constitution invalid ? 

The doctrine for which I am contending is not only clearly in- 
ferable from the plain language of the constitution, but by law has 
been expressly declared and established in practice since the' ex- 
istence of the government. 

The second section of the third article of the constitution ex- 
pressly extends the judicial power to all cases arising under the 
constitution, the laws, he. The provision in the second clause 
of the sixth article leaves nothing to doubt — " this constitution 
and the laws of the United States, which shall be made in pur- 
suance thereof, &sc, shall be the supreme law of the land." The 
constitution is absolutely the supreme law. Not so trie acts of the 
legislature Such only are the law of the land as are made in pur- 
suance of the constitution. 

I beo- the indulgence of the committee one moment, while I 
read the following provision from the twenty-fifth section of the 
judicial act of the year 1789 : " A final judgment or decree in any 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



199 



suit in the highest court of law or equity of a state, in which a de- 
cision in the suit could be had, where is drawn in question the 
validity of a treaty or statute of, or an authority exercised under, 
the United States, and the decision is against their validity, &lc, 
may be re-examined and reversed or affirmed in the supreme court 
of the United States upon a writ of error." Thus, as early as the 
year 1789, among the first acts of the government, the legislature 
explicitly recognized the right of a state court to declare a treaty, 
a statute, and an authority exercised under the United States, void, 
subject to the revision of the supreme court of the United States ; 
and it has expressly given the final power to the supreme court to 
affirm a judgment which is against the validity, either of a treaty, 
statute, or an authority of the government. 

I humbly trust, Mr. Chairman, that I have given abundant 
proofs, from the nature of our government, from the language of 
the constitution, and from legislative acknowledgment, that the 
judges of our courts have the power to judge and determine upon 
the constitutionality of our laws. 

Let me now suppose, that, in our frame of government, the 
judges are a check upon the legislature ; that the constitution is 
deposited in their keeping. Will you say afterwards, that their 
existence depends upon the legislature ? that the body whom 
they are to check has the power to destroy them ? Will you say 
that the constitution may be taken out of their hands, by a power 
the most to be distrusted, because the only power which could 
violate it with impunity ? Can any thing be more absurd than to 
admit that the judges are a check upon the legislature, and yet to 
contend that they exist at the will of the legislature ? A check 
must necessarily imply a power commensurate to its end. The 
political body, designed to check another, must be independenc of 
it, otherwise there can be no check. What check can there be 
when the power designed to be checked can annihilate the body 
which is to restrain it ? 

I go further, Mr. Chairman, and take a stronger ground. 1 
say, in the nature of things, the dependence of the judges upon 
the legislature, and their right to declare the acts of the legislature 
void, are repugnant, and cannot exist together. The doctrine, sh, 
supposes two rights — first, the right of the legislature to destroy 
the office of the judge, and the right of the judge to vacate the act 
of the legislature. You have a right to abolish, by a law, the of- 
fices of the judges of the circuit courts : they have a right to de- 
clare the law void. It unavoidably follows in the exercise of these 
rights, either that you destroy their rights or that, they destroy 
yours. This doctrine is not a harmless absurdity : it is a most dan- 
gerous heresy. It is a doctrine which cannot be practised without 



200 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH 



producing, not discord only, but bloodshed. If you pass the bill 
upon your table, the judges have a constitutional right to declare 
it void. I hope they will have courage to exercise that right ; 
and if, sir, I am called upon to take my side, standing acquitted, 
in my conscience and before my God, of all motives but. the sup-" 
port of the constitution of my country, I shall not tremble at the 
consequences. 

The constitution may have its enemies, but I know that it has 
also its friends. 1 beg gentlemen to pause before they take this 
rash step. There are many, very many, who believe, if you strike 
this blow, you inflict a mortal wound on the constitution. There 
are many now willing to spill their blood to defend that constitu- 
tion. Are gentlemen disposed to risk the consequences ? Sir, I 
mean no threats ; I have no expectation of appalling the stout 
hearts of my adversaries ; but if gentlemen are regardless of 
themselves, let them consider their wives and children, their 
neighbors and their friends. Will they risk civil dissension, will 
they hazard the welfare, will they jeopardize the peace of the 
country to save a paltry sum of money, less than thirty thousand 
dollars ? 

Mr. Chairman, I am confident that the friends of this measure 
are not apprized of the nature of its operation, nor sensible of the 
mischievous consequences which are likely to attend it. Sir, the 
morals of your people, the peace of the country, the stability of 
the government, rest upon the maintenance of the independence 
of the judiciary. It is not of half the importance in England that 
the judges should be independent of the crown, as it is with us, 
that they should be independent of the legislature. Am I asked, 
Would you render the judges superior to the legislature ? I an- 
swer No, but coordinate. Would you render them independent 
of the legislature ? I answer, Yes, independent of every power on 
earth, while they behave themselves well. The essential interests, 
the permanent welfare of society, require this independence ; not, 
sir, on account of the judge ; that is a small consideration ; but on 
account of those between whom he is to decide. You calculate 
on the weaknesses of human nature, and you suffer the judge to 
be dependent on no one, lest he should be partial to those on whom 
he depends. Justice does not exist where partiality prevails. A 
dependent judge cannot be impartial. Independence is, therefore, 
essential to the purity of your judicial tribunals. 

Let it be remembered, that no power is so sensibly felt by so- 
ciety as that of the judiciary. The life and property of every 
man is liable to be in the hands of the judges. Is it not our great 
interest to place our judges upon such high ground that no fear can 
ntnnidate, no hope seduce them ? The present measure humbles 



ON THE JUDICIARY. 



201 



them in the dust ; it prostrates them at the feet of faction ; it ren- 
ders them the tools of every dominant party. It is this effect 
which I deprecate ; it is this consequence which 1 deeply deplore. . 
What does reason, what does argument avail, when party spirit 
presides ? Subject your bench to the influence of this spirit, and 
justice bids a final adieu to your tribunals. We are asked, sir, it 
the judges are to be independent of the people. The question 
presents a false and delusive view. We are all the people. We 
are, and as long as we enjoy our freedom, we shall be divided into 
parties. The true question is, Shall the judiciary be permanent, 
or fluctuate with the tide of public opinion ? I beg, I implore 
gentlemen to consider the magnitude and value of the principle 
which they are about to annihilate. If your judges are independ 
ent of political changes, they may have their preferences, but they 
will not enter into the spirit of party. But let their existence de- 
pend upon the support of the power of a certain set of men, and 
they cannot be impartial. Justice will be trodden under foot. 
Your courts will lose all public confidence and respect. 

The judges will be supported by their partisans, who, in their 
turn, will expect impunity for the wrongs and violence they com- 
mit. The spirit of party will be inflamed to madness ; and the 
moment is not far off, when this fair country is to be desolated by 
a civil war. 

Do not say that you render the judges dependent only on the 
people. You make them dependent on your president. This is 
his measure. The same tide of public opinion which changes a 
president, will change the majorities in the branches of the legisla- 
ture. The legislature will be the instrument of his ambition, and 
he will have the courts as the instrument of his vengeance. He 
uses the legislature to remove the judges, that he may appoint 
creatures of his own. In effect, the powers of the government 
will be concentrated in the hands of one man, who will dare to act 
with more boldness, because he will be sheltered from responsi- 
bility. The independence of the judiciary was the felicity of our 
constitution. It was this principle which was to curb the fury of 
party on sudden changes. The first moments of power, gained by 
a struggle, are the most vindictive and intemperate. Raised above 
the storm, it was the judiciary which was to control the fiery zeal, 
and to quell the fierce passions of a victorious faction. 

We are standing on the brink of that revolutionary torrent which 
deluged in blood one of the fairest countries of Europe. 

France had her national assembly, more numerous and equally 
popular with our own. She had her tribunals of justice, and her 
juries. But the legislature and her courts were but the instru- 
ments of her destruction. Acts of proscription and sentences of 

Cc 



202 



MR. BAYARD'S SPEECH, &c. 



banishment and death were passed in the cabinet of a tyrant. 
Prostrate your judges at the feet of party, and you break down the 
. mounds which defend you from this torrent. I am done. I should 
have thanked my God for greater power to resist a measure so de- 
structive to the peace and happiness of the country. My feeble 
efforts can avail nothing. But it was my duty to make them. 
The meditated blow is mortal, and from the moment it is struck, 
we may bid a final adieu to the constitution. 



SPEECH OF GOUVERNEUR MORRIS, 

RELATIVE TO THE 

FREE NAVIGATION OF THE MISSISSIPPI, 

DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 
FEBRUARY 25, 1803. 



The treaty of 1795, between the United States and Spain, secured the free 
navigation of the river Mississippi, and a privilege of deposit in the isl- 
and of New Orleans, for three years, to the citizens of the United States. 

The treaty stipulated, moreover, that this privilege should be continued af- 
ter the expiration of the three years, if, during that time, it was found not 
to be prejudicial to the interests of Spain. And it further stipulated, that 
if the privilege should not be continued there, an equivalent establishment 
should be assigned at some other place upon the bank of the Mississippi. 

Iii October, 1802, the intendant of New Orleans issued a proclamation, pro- 
hibiting the citizens of the United States from depositing their merchan- 
dise, &c. at New Orleans, without assigning any other equivalent estab- 
lishment according to the provisions of the treaty. 

In reference to this alleged breach of the treaty, Mr. Ross introduced the 
following resolutions : — 

Resolved, That the United States of America have an indisputable right to 
the free navigation of the river Mississippi, and to a convenient deposit 
for their produce and merchandise in the island of New Orleans ; 

That the late infraction of such their unquestionable right is an aggression, 
hostile to their honor and interest ; 

That it does not consist with the dignity or safety of this union to hold a right 
so important by a tenure so uncertain ; 

That it materially concerns such of the American citizens as dwell on the 
western waters, and is essential to the union, strength and prosperity of 
these states, that they obtain complete security for the full and peaceful 
enjoyment of such their absolute right ; 

That the president be authorized to take immediate possession of some place 
or places in the said island, or the adjacent territories, fit and convenient 
for the purposes aforesaid, and to adopt such measures for obtaining that 
complete security, as to him, in his wisdom, shall seem meet ; 

That he be authorized to call into actual service any number of the militia of 
the states of South Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, Kentucky and Ohio, 
and the Mississippi Territory, which he may think proper, not exceeding 
fifty thousand, and to employ them, together with the naval and military 
force of the union, for effecting the object above mentioned ; and that the 
sum of five millions of dollars be appropriated to the carrying into effed 
the foregoing resolutions, and that the whole or any part of that sum be 



204 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH ON THE 



paid or applied on warrants, drawn in pursuance of such directions as the 
president may from time to time think proper to give to the secretary of 
the treasury. 

Mr. President, 
I rise with reluctance on the present occasion. The lateness 
of the hour forbids me to hope for your patient attention. The 
subject is of great importance as it relates to other countries, and 
still greater to our own ; yet we must decide on grounds uncertain, 
because they depend on circumstances not yet arrived. And when 
we attempt to penetrate into futurity, after exerting the utmost 
powers of reason, aided by all the lights which experience could 
acquire, our clearest conceptions are involved in doubt. A thou- 
sand things may happen, which it is impossible to conjecture, and 
which will influence the course of events. The wise Governor of 
all things hath hidden the future from the ken of our feeble under- 
standing. In committing ourselves, therefore, to the examination 
of what may hereafter arrive, we hazard reputation on contingen- 
cies we cannot command. And when events shall be past, we shall 
be judged by them, and not by the reasons which we may now 
advance. 

There are many subjects which it is not easy to understand, but 
it is always easy to misrepresent, and when arguments cannot be 
controverted, it is not difficult to calumniate motives. That which 
cannot be confuted may be misstated. The purest intentions may 
be blackened by malice ; and envy will ever foster the foulest im- 
putations. This calumny is among the sore evils of our country. 
It began with our earliest success in '78, and has gone on, with ac- 
celerated velocity and increasing force, to the present hour. It is 
no longer to be checked ; nor will it terminate but in that sweep of 
general destruction to which it tends with a step as sure as time, 
and fatal as death. I know that what I utter will be misunder- 
stood, misrepresented, deformed and distorted ; but we must do 
our duty. This, I believe, is the last scene of my public life ; and 
it shall, like those which have preceded it, be performed with can- 
dor and truth. Yes, my friends, we shall soon part to meet no 
more. But however separated, and wherever dispersed, we know 
that we are united by just principle and true sentiment — a senti- 
ment, my country, ever devoted to you, which will expire only 
with expiring life, and beat in the last pulsation of our hearts. 

Mr. President, my object is peace. I could assign many reasons 
to show that this declaration is sincere. But can it be necessary 
to give this senate any other assurance than my word ? Notwith- 
standing the acerbity of temper which results i*w party strife, 
gentlemen will believe me on my word. 1 will net pr^ceod, like 



NAVIGATION OF THE MISSISSIPPI. 205 



my honorable colleague (Mr. Clinton), to describe to you the 
waste, the ravages, and the horrors of war. I have not the same 
harmonious periods, nor the same musical tones ; neither shall 1 
boast of Christian charity, nor attempt to display that ingenuous 
glow of benevolence, so decorous to the cheek of youth, which 
gave a vivid tint to every sentence he uttered, and was, if possible, 
as impressive even as his eloquence. But, though we possess not 
the same pomp of words, our hearts are not insensible to the woes 
of humanity. We can feel for the misery of plundered towns, the 
conflagration of defenceless villages, and the devastation of cultured 
fields. Turning from these features of general distress, we can 
enter the abodes of private affliction, and behold the widow weep- 
ing, as she traces, in the pledges of connubial affection, the re- 
semblance of him whom she has lost forever. We see the aged 
matron bending over the ashes of her son. He was her darling, 
for he was generous and brave ; and therefore his spirit led him to 
the field in defence of his country. We can observe another op- 
pressed with unutterable anguish ; condemned to conceal her af- 
fection ; forced to hide that passion, which is at once the torment 
and delight of life : she learns that those eyes, which beamed with 
sentiment, are closed in death ; and his lip, the ruby harbinger of 
joy, lies pale and cold, the miserable appendage of a mangled 
corse. Hard, hard indeed, must be that heart which can be in- 
sensible to scenes like these ; and bold the man who dare present 
to the Almighty Father a conscience crimsoned with the blood of 
his children ! 

Yes, sir, we wish for peace ; but how is that blessing to be pre- 
served ? I shall repeat here a sentiment I have often had occa- 
sion to express. In my opinion, there is nothing worth fighting 
for but national honor; for in the national honor is involved the 
national independence. I know that a state may find itself in such 
unpropitious circumstances, that prudence may force a wise gov- 
ernment to conceal the sense of indignity. But the insult should 
be engraven on tablets of brass with a pencil of steel. And when 
that time and chance, which happen to all, shall bring forward the 
favorable moment, then let the avenging arm strike home. It is 
by avowing and maintaining this stern principle of honor, that 
peace can be preserved. But let it not be supposed that any thing 
I say has the slightest allusion to the injuries sustained from 
France, while suffering in the pangs of her revolution. As soon 
should I upbraid a sick man for what he might have done in the 
paroxysms of disease. Nor is this a new sentiment : it was felt 
and avowed at the time when these wrongs were heaped upon us 
and I appeal for the proof to the files of your secretary of state 
The destinies of France were then in the hands of monsters. By 
the decree of Heaven she was broken on the wheel, in the face of 
18 



206 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH ON THE 



the world, to warn mankind of her folly and madness. But these 
scenes have passed away. On the throne of the Bourbons is 
now seated the first of the Gallic Caesars. At the head of that 
gallant nation is the great, the greatest man of the present age. 
It becomes us well to consider his situation. The things he has 
achieved compel him to the achievement of things more great. 
In his vast career, we must soon become objects to command at- 
tention. We, too, in our turn, must contend or submit. By sub- 
mission we may indeed have peace, alike precarious and ignomin- 
ious. But is this the peace which we ought to seek ? Will this 
satisfy the just expectation of our country ? No. Let us have 
peace, permanent, secure, and, if I may use the term, inde- 
pendent — peace, which depends not on the pity of others, but on 
our own force. Let us have the only peace worth having — a 
peace consistent with honor. 

A gentleman near me (Mr. Jackson) has told us the anecdote 
of an old courtier, who said, that the interest of his nation was the 
honor of his nation. I was surprised to hear that idea from that 
gentleman ; but it was not his own. Such is that gentleman's 
high sense of his personal honor, that no interest would induce 
him to sacrifice it. He would not permit the proudest prince on 
earth to blot or soil it. Millions would not purchase his honor ; 
and will he feel less for the honor of his country ? No ; he will 
defend it with his best blood. He will feel with me, that our 
national honor is the best security for our peace and our pros- 
perity ; that it involves at once our wealth and our power. And 
in this view of the subject, I must contradict a sentiment which 
fell from my honorable colleague (Mr. Clinton). He tells us, 
that the principle of this country is peace and commerce. Sir, 
the avowal of such principle will leave us neither commerce nor 
peace. It invites others to prey on that commerce, which we 
will not protect, and share the wealth we dare not defend. But 
let it be known, that you stand ready to sacrifice the last man, 
and the last shilling, in defence of your national honor, and those, 
who would have assailed, will beware of you. 

Before I go into a minute consideration of this subject, I will 
notice what the gentlemen opposed to me have said on the law 
of nations. But I must observe, that, in a conjuncture like, the 
present, there is more sound sense, and more sound policy, in the 
firm and manly sentiments which warm the hearts of my friends 
from Delaware, than in all the volumes upon all the shelves of the 
civilians. Let us, however, attend to the results of those logical 
deductions which have been made by writers on the law of na- 
tions. The honorable member from Kentucky (Mr. Brecken- 
ridge) has told us, that sovereigns ought to show a sincere desire 
of peace, and should not hastily take offence ; because it may be, 



NAVIGATION OF THE MISSISSIPPI. 207 



that the offensive act was the result of mistake. My honorable 
colleague has told us, that among the justifiable causes of war are 
the deliberate invasions of right, and the necessity of maintaining 
the balance of power. He has told us, further, that attempts 
should always be made to obtain redress by treaty, unless it be 
evident that redress cannot be so obtained. The honorable 
member from Georgia, near me, informs us, that the thing we 
would obtain by war should be important, and the success proba- 
ble, and that war should be avoided until it be inevitable. The 
honorable member from Maryland (Mr. Wright) has explained 
to us the case cited by the gentleman from Kentucky, as being 
that of a wrong done by a private citizen. Under the weight of 
all this authority, and concurring with gentlemen in these their 
positions, I shall take leave to examine the great question we are 
called on to decide. I shall moreover fully and entirely agree 
with the honorable member near me in another point. He has, 
with the usual rapidity of his mind, seized the whole object. He 
tells us, and he tells us truly, that the island of Orleans and the 
two Floridas are essential to this country. They are joined, says 
he, by God, and sooner or later we must and will have them. In 
this clear and energetic statement I fully agree ; and the greater 
part of what I have to say will be but a commentary on the doc- 
trines they have advanced, an elucidation of their positions, and 
the confirmation of that strong conclusion. 

In order to bring this extensive subject within such bounds as 
may enable us to take a distant view of its several parts, I shall 
consider, first, the existing state of things ; secondly, the conse- 
quence to the United States of the possession of that country by 
France ; thirdly, the consequence to other nations ; fourthly, the 
importance of it to France herself; fifthly, its importance to the 
United States if possessed by them ; and having thus examined 
the thing itself in its various relations, the way will be open to 
consider, sixthly, the effect of negotiation ; and then, seventhly, 
the consequences to be expected from taking immediate possession. 

Before I consider the existing state of things, let me notice 
what gentlemen. have said in relation to it. The honorable mem- 
ber from Kentucky has told us, that indeed there is a right arrest- 
ed, but whether by authority or not, is equivocal. He says the 
representative of Spain verily believes it to be an unauthorized 
act. My honorable colleague informs us, there has been a clash- 
ing between the governor and the intendant. He says, we are 
told by the Spanish minister it was unauthorized. Notwithstand- 
ing these assurances, however, my honorable colleague has, it 
seems, some doubts ; but, nevertheless, he presumes innocence ; 
for my colleague is charitable. The honorable member from Ma- 
ryland goes further : he tells us the minister of Spain says, the 



208 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH ON THE 



intendant had no such authority ; and the minister of France, too, 
says there is no such authority. Sir, I have all possible respect 
for those gentlemen, and every proper confidence in what they 
may think proper to communicate. I believe the Spanish minis- 
ter has the best imaginable disposition to preserve peace ; being 
indeed the express purpose for which he was sent among us. I 
believe it to be an object near to his heart, and which has a strong 
hold upon his affections. I respect the w T armth and benevolence 
of his feelings, but he must pardon me that I am deficient in 
courtly compliment ; I am a republican, and cannot commit the 
interests of my country to the goodness of his heart. 

What is the state of things ? There has been a cession of the 
island of New Orleans and of Louisiana to France. Whether 
the Floriclas have also been ceded is not yet certain. It has 
been said, as from authority, and I think it probable. Now, 
sir, let us note the time and the manner of this cession. It 
was at or immediately after the treaty of Luneville, at the first 
moment when France could take up a distant object of atten- 
tion. But had Spain a right to make this cession without our 
consent ? Gentlemen have taken it for granted that she had. 
But I deny the position. No nation has a right to give to another 
a dangerous neighbor without her consent. This is not like the 
case of private citizens ; for there, when a man is injured, he can 
resort to the tribunals for redress ; and yet, even there, to dispose 
of property to one who is a bad neighbor is always considered 
as an act of unkindness. But as between nations who can re- 
dress themselves only by war, such transfer is in itself an aggres- 
sion. He who renders me insecure — he who hazards my peace, 
and exposes me to imminent danger — commits an act of hostility 
against me, and gives me the rights consequent on that act. Sup- 
pose Great Britain should give to Algiers one of the Bahamas, 
and contribute thereby to establish a nest of pirates near your 
coasts; would you not consider it as an aggression? Suppose, 
during the late war, you had conveyed to France a tract of land 
along the river Hudson and the northern route by the lakes into 
Canada, would not Britain have considered and treated it as an 
act of direct -hostility ? It is among the first limitations to the ex- 
ercise of the rights of property, that we must so use our own 
as not to injure another ; and it is under the immediate sense of 
this restriction that nations are bound to act toward each other. 

But it is not this transfer alone : there are circumstances, both in 
the time and in the manner of it, which deserve attention. A 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Wright) has told you, that all 
treaties ought to be published and proclaimed for the information 
of other nations. I ask, was this a public treaty ? No. Was 
official notice of it given to the government of this country ? 



NAVIGATION OF THE MISSISSIPPI. 209 



Was it announced to the president of the United States, in the 
usual forms of civility between nations who duly respect each 
other ? It was not. Let gentlemen contradict me if they can. 
They will say, perhaps, that it was the omission only of a vain 
and idle ceremony. Ignorance may, indeed, pretend, that such 
communication is an empty compliment, which, established with- 
out use, may be omitted without offence. But this is not so. If 
these be ceremonies, they are not vain, but of serious import, and 
are founded on strong reason. He who means me well, acts 
without disguise. Had this transaction been intended fairly, it 
would have been told frankly. But it was secret because it was 
hostile. The first consul, in the moment of terminating his dif- 
ferences with you, sought the means of future influence and con- 
trol. He found and secured a pivot for that immense lever by 
which, with potent arm, he means to subvert your civil and polit- 
ical institutions. Thus the beginning was made in deep hostility. 
Conceived in such principles, it presaged no good. Its bodings 
were evil, and evil have been its fruits. We heard of it during 
the last session of congress ; but to this hour we have not heard 
of any formal and regular communication from those by whom 
it was made. Has the king of Spain — has the first consul of 
France — no means of making such communication to the pres- 
ident of the United States ? Yes, sir, we have a minister in 
Spain ; we have a minister in France. Nothing was easier, and 
yet nothing has been done. Our first magistrate has been treated 
with contempt; and through him our country has been insulted. 

With that meek and peaceful spirit, now so strongly recom- 
mended, we submitted to this insult ; and what followed ? That 
which might have been expected ; a violation of our treaty — an 
open and direct violation by a public officer of the Spanish govern- 
ment. This is not the case cited from one of the books. It is 
not a wrong done by a private citizen, which might, for that rea- 
son, be of doubtful nature. No ; it is by a public officer — that 
officer, whose particular department it was to cause the faithful 
observance of the treaty which he has violated. We are told, in- 
deed, that there was a clashing of opinion between the governor 
and the intendant. But what have we to do with their domestic 
broils ? The injury is done : we feel it. Let the fault be whose 
it may, the suffering is ours. But, say gentlemen, the Spanish 
minister has interfered to correct this irregular procedure. Sir, if 
the intendant was amenable to the minister, why did he not inform 
him of the step he was about to take, that the president of the 
United States might seasonably have been apprized of his inten- 
tion, and given the proper notice to our fellow-citizens ? Why 
has he first learned this offensive act from those who suffer by it? 
Why is he thus held up to contempt and derision ? If the in 
18* Dd 



210 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH ON THE 



tendant is to be controlled by the minister, would he have taken 
a step so important without his advice ? Common sense will say- 
no. But the bitter cup of humiliation was not yet full. Smart- 
ing under the lash of the intendant, the minister soothes you with 
kind assurances, and sends advice-boats to announce your forbear- 
ance. But while they are on their way, new injury and new in- 
sult are added. The intendant, as if determined to try the extent 
of your meekness, forbids to your citizens all communication with 
those who inhabit the shores of the Mississippi. Though they 
should be starving, the Spaniard is made criminal who should give 
them food. Fortunately, the waters of the river are potable, or 
else we should be precluded from the common benefits of nature, 
the common bounty of Heaven. What, then, I ask, is the amount 
of this savage conduct? Sir, it is war — open and direct war. 
And yet gentlemen recommend peace, and forbid us to take up 
the gauntlet of defiance. Will gentlemen sit here and shut their 
eyes to' the state and condition of their country? I shall not re- 
ply to what has been said respecting depredations on commerce, 
but confine myself to objects of which there can be no shadow 
of doubt. Here is a vast country given away, and not without 
danger to us. Has a nation a right to put these states in a dan- 
gerous situation ? No, sir. And yet it has been done, not only 
without our consent previous to the grant, but without observing 
the common forms of civility after it was made. Is that wonder- 
ful man who presides over the destinies of France ignorant or 
unmindful of these forms ? See what was done the other day. 
He directed his minister to communicate to the elector of Bavaria 
his intended movements in Switzerland, arid their object. He 
knew the elector had a right to expect that information, although 
the greater part of Suabia lies between his dominions and Switzer- 
land. And this right is founded on the broad principles already 
mentioned. 

As to the depredations on our commerce, they are numerous, 
and of great importance ; but my honorable colleague has told us, 
our merchants are in a fair way of getting redress, I own, sir, I 
am surprised at this information, which is, I presume, a state 
secret, communicated from the executive department. My hon- 
orable colleague, who is the pattern of discretion, who was the 
monitor, and threatened to be the castigator of those, who, from 
treachery or weakness, might betray or divulge the secrets of the 
senate, cannot possibly allude to any thing on our files. He has, 
therefore, received this information from some other quarter, and 
I feel myself much obliged by his kind communication. But he 
must pardon me, sir, that, until it comes forward in some body, 
shape, or condition which I can grasp, I am compelled to with- 
hold my faith. 



NAVIGATION OF THE MISSISSIPPI. 



211 



Having thus examined the existent state of things, I proceed to 
consider the consequence to the United States, resulting from the 
possession of that country by France. To this effect, I shall sup- 
pose the Floridas to be included in her newly-acquired dominion, 
and shall state what I conceive to be the conduct which she will 
pursue. She will, I presume, consider herself as not bound by 
our treaty with Spain. Declaring this to the inhabitants of the 
western country, and repelling the claim of right, she will (as 
matter of favor) give them unlimited freedom of trade to and from 
New Orleans. At that place, she will eventually raise a consid- 
erable duty on exports, to pay the expense of her garrisons, and 
of the civil administration. But, to compensate this, she will 
probably give an exclusive privilege of commerce to her colonies, 
and obtain from Spain and Holland similar privileges. Under 
these circumstances, let us examine the general and particular con- 
sequences to this, our country. 

The genera] consequences are those which affect our com- 
merce, our revenue, our defence, and what is of more importance 
even than these, our union. Your commerce will suffer, because 
you will no longer hold the means of supplying the West India 
islands, subject to your single control ; and because all the export 
from New Orleans, being, of course, in French bottoms, your 
navigation will be proportionably diminished. Your revenue will 
suffer as much as your commerce. The extensive boundary of 
more than two thousand miles will be stocked with goods for the 
purpose of contraband trade. The inhabitants will naturally take 
their supplies in that way. You must, therefore, multiply your 
revenue officers and their assistants, and while your receipt dimin- 
ishes, the expense of collection will be increased. As to what 
regards your defence, it is evident, that the decrease of your navi- 
gation and revenue must narrow your means of defence. You 
cannot provide the same force, either by land or by sea ; but the 
evil does not stop here. With this country in your possession, 
you have means of defence more ample, more important, more 
easy than any nation on earth. In a short time, all the West 
India islands, fed from your granaries, must depend on your will. 
And, in consequence, all the powers of Europe, who have colo- 
nies there, must court your friendship. Those rich sources of 
commercial importance will be, as it were, in your hands. They 
will be pledges for the amity of others, in seas and dominions far 
remote. It is a defence, which, though it costs you nothing, is 
superior to fleets and armies. But let the resources of America 
be divided (which must happen when the French are masters of 
New Orleans), and all this power and influence are gone. One 
half of your resources will be in their hands, and they will laugh 
at your feeble attempts with the other half. It is the interest of 



212 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH ON THE 



this country, that the possessions of European powers in the West 
Indies should be secured to them ; and in this view of the sub- 
ject, it is important that the island of St. Domingo should be 
subjected by France : it would, therefore, have been wise to 
have aided in that subjugation. There is, indeed, a special rea- 
son for it beyond the considerations of external policy. That 
event will give to your slaves the conviction, that it is impossible 
for them to become free. Men in their unhappy condition must 
be impelled by fear, and discouraged by despair. Yes — the im- 
pulsion of fear must be strengthened by the hand of despair ! 
Consider, moreover, your condition in the wars which are most 
likely to happen. These must be either with France or England. 
If with France, your interior is ruined ; if with England, the 
commerce of the Atlantic states will be distressed, and that of the 
western country too, though not perhaps in so great a degree. 
Thus let the war be with whichsoever of those nations it may, 
one half of the United States must be peculiarly injured ; and in 
all cases, it will be difficult for them to assist each other. The 
interior has no seamen for naval defence ; the seaboard can send 
few, if any troops, beyond the mountains. This powerful influ- 
ence of one nation on one great division of our country, and of 
another nation on the remainder, will tend to disunite us. The 
ridge of mountains will mark the line of distinct interests. The 
effect of those differing interests will be felt in your councils. It 
will find its way to this floor. This must be the case so long as 
man is man. Look, I pray, at those nations. The enmity of 
France and England can terminate only by the subjection of one 
to the dominion of the other. It must be by the complete exer- 
tion of force, and the utter impossibility of resistance. They are 
the Rome and Carthage of modern times. Their implacable 
spirit will stimulate them to attempt a division of this country, by 
sentiments of hatred, deadly as their own. These efforts will, 1 
hope, be vain : but with such powerful engines to operate on the 
interest and the will, is there not danger to that union so essential 
to our prosperity ? There will be a constant struggle in congress 
as to the kind of public force which ought to be maintained. 
The one part will desire an army, the other a navy. The un- 
yielding spirit of party will, perhaps, prevent the support of 
either ; leaving the nation completely defenceless, and thereby 
increasing the power of those who may influence or command our 
destinies. For, let it be remembered, that a nation without public 
force is not an independent nation. In a greater or smaller de- 
gree, she will receive the law from others. 

Having thus considered the effect of this cession upon the Uni- 
ted States, in a general point of view, let us now examine it more 
particularly as it regards the greater divisions of our country ; the 



NAVIGATION OF THE MISSISSIPPI. 



213 



Western, the Southern, the Middle, and the Eastern States. I fear, 
sir, I shall detain you longer than I intended, certainly longer than 
the light of day will last, notwithstanding my effort to comprise 
what I have to say in the smallest compass. As to the Western 
States, the effects will be remote and immediate. Those more re- 
mote may be examined under the twofold aspect of peace and war. 
* In peace, they will suffer the diminution of price for their produce. 
The advantage of supplying the French, Dutch and Spanish col- 
onies may, at first sight, lead to a different opinion ; but when the 
port of New Orleans is shut to all but French ships, there will no 
longer be that competition which now exists, and which always re- 
sults in the highest price that commodities can bear. The French 
merchants have neither the large capital, nor have they the steady 
temper and persevering industry which foster commerce. Their 
invariable object in trade is to acquire sudden wealth by large 
profit ; and if that cannot be done, they abandon the pursuit for 
some new project. Certain of the market, and certain of the in- 
creasing supply, they will prescribe the price, both to those who 
cultivate, and to those who consume. Such will be the effect in 
peace. In a war with England, the attention of her fleets to cut 
off supplies from her enemies, must necessarily affect the price of 
produce in a still greater degree ; and in a war with France it will 
bear no price at all until New Orleans shall be wrested from their 
grasp. Add to this the danger and the devastation from the troops 
of that country, aided by innumerable hosts of savages from the 
western wilds. Such being the evident, effects to be produced in 
times not far remote, the present evil follows from the anticipation 
of them. The price of land must be reduced from the certainty 
that its produce will become less valuable. The flood' of emigra- 
tion to those fertile regions must cease to flow. The debts, in- 
curred in the hope of advantageous sales, must remain unpaid. 
The distress of the debtor must then recoil on his creditor, and, 
from the common relations of society, become general. 

What will be the effect on the Southern Slates ? Georgia, Car- 
olina and the Mississippi Territory are exposed to invasion from the 
Floridas and New Orleans. There are circumstances in that por- 
tion of America which render the invasion easy, and the defence 
difficult. Pensacola, though the climate be warm, is among the 
healthiest spots on earth. Not only a large garrison, but an army 
may remain there without hazard. At Pensacola and St. Augus- 
tine forces may be assembled to operate in that season of the year 
when the morasses which separate them from our southern frontiei 
no longer breathe pestilence. By what are those armies to be op- 
posed ? Will you call the militia from the north to assist their 
southern brethren ? They are too remote. Will you, to secure 



214 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH ON THE 



their seasonable aid, bring them early to the fields they are ordered 
to defend ? They must perish. The climate, more fatal than the 
sword, will destroy them before they see their foe. The country 
adjoining to our southern frontier is now in possession of the most 
numerous tribes of savages we are acquainted with. The access 
to it from New Orleans and the Floridas is easy and immediate. 
The toys and gewgaws manufactured in France will be scattered 
m abundance, to win their affections and seduce them from their 
present connection. The talents of the French to gain the good 
will of the savages, is well known ; and the disposition of those 
uncultured men for w r ar is equally notorious. Here, then, is a 
powerful instrument of destruction, which may be used against you 
with ruinous effect. Besides, what is the population of the South- 
ern States ? Do you not tremble when you look at it ? Have we 
not, within these few days, passed a law to prevent the importa- 
tion of certain dangerous characters ? What will hinder them from 
arriving in the Floridas, and what can guard the approach from 
thence to our southern frontier ? These pernicious emissaries may 
stimulate, with a prospect of freedom, the miserable men who now 
toil without hope. They may excite them to imitate a fatal ex- 
ample, and to act over those scenes which fill our minds with hor- 
ror. When the train shall be laid, when the conspiracy shall be 
ripe, when the armies of France shall have reached your frontier, 
the firing of the first musket will be a signal for general carnage 
and conflagration. If you will not see your danger now, the time 
must soon arrive when you shall feel it. The Southern States 
bung exposed to such imminent danger, their representatives may 
be made to know, that a vote given in congress shall realize the 
worst apprehensions. You will then feel their danger even on 
this floor. 

Such being the probable result as to the Southern, what will it 
be to the Middle States ? Their trade to the West India islands is 
gone the moment that country is in possession of the French. 
England, to whose dominions alone they can have recourse for the 
vent, of their produce and the purchase of their supplies, will con- 
fine that commerce to her own ships. I say, the moment the 
French are in possession of New Orleans, your West India trade 
is gone. I do not mean that this effect will be sudden as a flash 
of lightning ; but it will be gone in a few years, which may be con- 
sidered as a moment, when compared with national existence. 
You will then be dependent for that trade on the good will of Eng- 
land ; and, as your navigation decreases, your dependence will be 
still greater, because you will rely on her navy for your protection. 
I again repeat, that when it shall be a question in your councils 
whether you will have a navy, the increasing weight, of the west- 



NAVIGATION OF THE MISSISSIPPI. 



215 



em country will be thrown into the scale of opposition. They 
will insist on an army for their protection. My honorable colleague 
has expressed his fears from a standing army. Sir, your present 
negligence will put you under the necessity of having such an ar- 
my, and expose you to all the consequences to be apprehended 
from it. You may, indeed, remain united in a body as one nation, 
but with such contrarient interests and opinions, with sentiments 
and views so different, it will be a large and languishing body with- 
out a soul. 

To the Eastern States, when separately considered, this may ap- 
pear a matter of less moment than to the other great divisions of 
our country. But they will perceive in it the loss of their navi- 
gation ; they will see the theatre of their industrious exertions con- 
tracted ; they will feel the loss of the productions of that western 
world in the mass of their commercial operations; and above all, 
they will feel the loss of an ample resource for their children. 
These western regions are peculiarly their heritage. It is the 
property of the fathers of America, which they hold in trust for 
their children. The exuberant population of the Eastern States 
flows in a steady stream to the western world ; and if that be ren- 
dered useless, or pass under the dominion of a foreign power, the 
fairest hope of posterity is destroyed. The time may come, and 
I fear it will come, when those who cross the mountains will cross 
the line of jurisdiction. Whether we consider, therefore, this ob- 
ject in its relations to our general policy, or examine its bearings 
on the greater divisions of our country, we find ample reason to 
agree with the gentleman near me, that New Orleans and the 
Floridas must not be separated from the United States. 

Let us now consider the consequence of the cession we com- 
plain of to other nations ; and this we may do ^generally, and then 
more especially as to those who have a direct and immediate in- 
terest in the transaction. In a general view, the first prominent 
feature is the colossal power of France. Dangerous to Europe 
and to the world, what will be the effect of a great increase of that 
power? Look at Europe. One half of it is blotted from the list 
of empire. Austria, Russia, Prussia and Britain are the only pow- 
ers remaining, except Sweden and Denmark and they are para- 
lized. Where is Italy, Switzerland, Flanders, and all Germany 
west of the Rhine ? Gone, swallowed up in the empire of the 
Gauls ! Holland, Spain, Portugal, reduced to a state of submis 
sion and dependence ! What is the situation of the powers that 
remain ? Austria is cut off from Italy, the great object of her am- 
bition for more than three centuries ; long the rival of France, long 
balancing with the Bourbons the fate of Europe, she must now 
submit, and tacitly acknowledge to the world the superiority of her 



•216 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH ON THE 



foe and her own humiliation. Prussia, under the auspices of the 
great Frederick, was at the head of a Germanic league to balance 
the imperial power. Though united with Austria for a moment m 
the hollow league of the coalition, she has, like Austria, been ac- 
tuated by a blind jealousy, and favoring the operations of France 
for the ruin of her rival, expected to share largely in the general 
spoil. In this fond hope she is disappointed ; she now sees the 
power of France at her door. There is not a fortress from the 
Rhine to the Baltic, except Magdeburg, which the first consul may 
leave on his left. The fertile plains near Leipsic contain the 
magazines for his armies, when he shall think proper to march to 
Berlin. Westphalia and Lower Saxony are open on the side of 
Flanders and Holland. The Maine presents him a military road 
to the borders of Bohemia. By the Necker he approaches Ulm, 
and establishes himself on the Danube. These rivers enable him 
to take the vast resources of his wide domain to the point where 
he may w T ish to employ them. Menacing at pleasure his neigh- 
bors, he is himself secured by a line of fortresses along his whole 
frontier. Switzerland, which w r as the only feeble point of his de- 
fence, and which separated his Gallic and Italian dominions, has 
lately been subjected. The voice you now hear w T arned the 
Swiss of their fate more than eight years ago. The idea seemed 
then extravagant ; but realized, it appears but as a necessary inci- 
dent. Russia is deprived of he/ influence in Germany, and there- 
by of a principal instrument by which her policy might operate on 
the great powers of the south. The Germanic body is, indeed, in 
the band of the first consul. Three new electors along the Rhine 
are under the mouths of his cannon. They dare not speak — 
speak ! None dare speak ; they dare not think any thing incon- 
sistent with his wishes. Even at their courtly feasts they sit like 
Damocles, destruction suspended over their heads by a single 
hair. Would you know the sentiment of England ? Look at the 
debates in the two houses of parliament ; they speak their fears. 
Such being the general sentiment of Europe, can it be supposed 
that they will view, without anxiety, a new extension of that 
power and dominion, the object oT their hatred and apprehension ? 

Will it be said that there is a security to the freedom of man- 
kind from the moderation with which this enormous power is to 
be exercised ? Vain delusion ! This power is not the result of 
accident. At the moment when France dethroned her sovereign, 
it w T as easy to foresee that a contest must ensue, in which her ex- 
istence would be staked against the empire of the world. If not 
conquered by surrounding princes (and the hope of such con- 
quest, unless by the aid of her own citizens, was idle), her nu- 
merous armies, acquiring discipline, must eventually conquer- 



NAVIGATION OF THE MISSISSIPPI. 



217 



She had the advantages of situation, and those which result from 
union, opposed to councils uncertain and selfish. It was easy also 
to foresee, that in the same progress of events, some fortunate sol- 
dier would seat himself on the vacant throne ; for the idea of a 
French republic was always a ridiculous chimera. Bonaparte 
has placed himself at the head of that nation by deeds which cast 
a lustre on his name. In his splendid career he must proceed. 
When he ceases to act, he will cease to reign. Whenever, in any 
plan, he fails, that moment he falls. He is condemned to magnifi- 
cence. To him are forbidden the harmonies and the charities of 
social life. He commands a noble and gallant nation passionately 
fond of glory. That nation stimulates him to glorious enterprise, 
and because they are generous and brave, they insure his success. 
Thus the same principle presents at once the object and the means. 
Impelled by imperious circumstances, he rules in Europe, and he 
will rule here also, unless by vigorous exertion you set a bound to 
his power. 

Having thus cast a rapid glance on the general state of Europe, 
it remains to look particularly at the condition of England and 
Spain, so far as they may be affected by the cession of those 
provinces to France. England will see in it an increase of com- 
merce and naval force for her rival. She will see imminent dan- 
ger to her islands, and particularly to Jamaica. The climate of 
Pensacola has already been noticed. The position is of incalcula- 
ble moment. During the sickly and hurricane season, fleets and 
armies may wait there in safety, till their enemy shall be enfeebled 
and unprotected. Where will the British fleets and armies be 
stationed with equal advantage ? If they ask an asylum in your 
ports, you must refuse ; for, should you listen to any such propo- 
sition, your kindness would be considered as a hostile aggression. 
The influence of France on the United States (which has already 
been noticed) will give double weight to her representations. 
And this very influence is among the effects which Britain must 
deprecate. I have not time to dwell on this subject, nor many 
others as fully as I ought. The condition of Spain is not less 
worthy of notice. No two nations on earth have more rooted 
hatred for each other than France and Spain. There are none 
more different in essential points of character. United, however, 
under sovereigns of the same family, these antipathies were wear- 
ing away. But the fatal stroke which destroyed the French 
monarch has severed that band. Force has since produced not 
union, but submission. It is not in nature that the Spanish king 
should foster kindly sentiments for him who has decked himself in 
the spoil of his house. The proud, the brave and the loyal Cas- 
tilian groans under the yoke which galls him, but which he ca» 
19 Ee 



213 MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH ON THE 



not break, and sickens at the recollection of his ancient glorv 
His deep resentments are known, and it is to prevent their effects 
that he has been compelled to make the cession of those provinces. 
France will then hold at her discretion the Spanish treasures, and 
the rich provinces of the new world. At the first symptom of hos- 
tile sentiment, she arrests the means of aggression. Thus the de- 
pendence of Spain is rendered absolute, and her chains are riveted 
forever. Does Spain behold this state of things with calm indif- 
ference ? No : she feels all the pangs of wounded pride, driven to 
the necessity of perpetuating its own humiliation. 

A few words, after what has already been said, will suffice to 
show the importance of those provinces to France. This results 
from the influence on her rival, on Spain, and on the United States, 
by means of the position, the resources and the means of aggres- 
sion which those provinces afford. Enough has been said of the 
position. The resources are great and increasing. Not only cot- 
ton and indigo will be furnished for her manufactures, but supplies 
and subsistence for her colonies and her troops. These resources, 
too, will be at the very point most important, both for defence and 
aggression. The same force will be ready to operate either against 
England, Spain, or America. Thus that force will be trebled in 
its moral effect, and influence alike the conduct of all, against 
whom it may be directed. To what has been said on the facility 
with which we may be assailed, I might add much, but it is un- 
necessary. It behooves us, however, to consider well the spirit of 
the French government, which, in all its changes, has never lost 
sight of this object. The French minister, M. de la Luzerne, 
when congress were deliberating on the ultima for peace, obtained 
a resolution that our ministers should, as to our western boundary, 
treat under the dictation of France. Our ministers disdained the 
condition, and refused to obey. Their manly conduct obtained 
for you the countries whose fate is now suspended on your delib- 
erations. Never, no, never has France lost sight of Louisiana. 
Never for a moment has she been blind to its importance. Those 
who, driven from her bosom into exile, wandered about among us, 
have gathered and communicated the fullest information. While 
they enjoyed your hospitality, they probed your weakness, and 
meditated the means of controlling your conduct. Whatever may 
be the fair appearances, rely on it, that every Frenchman bears 
with him every where a French heart ; and so he ought. I 
honor him for it. O that Americans had always an American 
heart ! 

It remains to notice the advantage of this country to the United 
States, as it may relate to our power, our peace, our commerce, 
and, above all, to our freedom. As to our power, something has 



NAVIGATION OF THE MISSISSIPPI 



219 



already been said on the peaceful influence which results from the 
dependence of colonies belonging to the great nations of Europe : 
add to this, that the product of those colonies must pass by our 
doors and be exposed to our cruisers. A further advantage is to 
be found in the ready means of invasion (in concert with the 
troops of others), if driven to the necessity of war. The posses- 
sion of power will give us, not only security, but peace. Peace 
indeed can never be safe but by the aid of power. Our disposition 
is pacific. It is our interest to be at peace, and the form of our 
government, while it secures to us the enjoyment of as much lib- 
erty as is possible, renders it particularly imprudent to risk in war 
any change of the constitution. Grant us these provinces, and we 
can dictate the conditions of our commerce with the islands. Pos- 
sessed of them it will be doubly lucrative, and without them wholly 
uncertain. There is another stream of profitable trade which will 
then flow in our channels. The risk and difficulty which Spain 
experiences in bringing home her treasures, when she is at war, 
will naturally suggest the advantage of remitting them though this 
country. The produce of the Mexican mines may then be shipped 
directly to Asia. It will be paid for to Spain by bills on the com- 
mercial nations, and thus furnish to her the easy means of obtain- 
ing the supplies she may stand in need of. The bullion will be so 
much the more valuable, as the danger and expense of transporta- 
tion are diminished. This, therefore, would have a beneficial re- 
sult upon the whole commercial world. It would more especially 
emancipate Spain from her present thraldom. It would give a 
happy change to all her interior administration, and increase both 
her absolute and relative force. Let me say here, that it is our 
interest to preserve the authority of Spain over her American ter- 
ritory. We have enough of our own. We can have no wish to 
extend our dominions. We want men, not land. We are, there- 
fore, the natural and the safe guardians of Spain. On us she may 
rely with perfect confidence. We can derive from that commerce 
which it is her interest to permit, all the advantage we ought to 
ask. But great as are the benefits which will result from the pos- 
session of the Floridas and New Orleans — great as is their tenden- 
cy to advance our power, secure our peace, and extend our com- 
merce — there is a consideration, in comparison with which, com- 
merce, peace and power are of but slight avail. These provinces 
will fortify the defences of our freedom. My honorable colleague 
has stated to you his apprehensions of standing armies. And yet, 
sir, if we be not possessed of this territory, standing armies become 
necessary. Without an imposing military force, the inhabitants of 
the western country will be in such immediate danger, that they 
must league with a neighbor who will have every thing to ofFer ; 



220 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH ON THE 



and from whom they will have every thing to fear. This will lead 
to the worst of all wars, to civil war. And when that shall hap- 
pen, liberty will soon be lost. The army, which has defeated one 
half the nation, will easily lend itself to enslave the other. Such 
is the history, and such will ever be the fate of man. In this view, 
then, above all others, is that possession most precious. When it 
is in our hands, we need no standing army. We can turn our 
whole attention to naval defence, which gives complete security, 
both at home and abroad. When we have twenty ships of the 
line at sea (and there is no good reason why we should not have 
them), we shall be respected by all Europe. The sense of secu- 
rity resulting from such force, must give a new spring to industry 
and increase the stock of national wealth. The expense, com- 
pared with the benefit, is moderate, nay, trifling. And let me 
here say one word as to national expense. Sir, whatever sums 
are necessary to secure the national independence, must be paid. 
They will not amount to one half of what it must cost us to be 
subdued. If we will not pay to be defended, we must pay for 
beingr conquered. There is no medium, and but the single alter- 
native. In the proper expenditure for defence, therefore, is true 
economy ; and every pitiful saving inconsistent with that object, 
is the worst, the most profligate profusion. 

Having now considered, in its various relations, the importance 
of these provinces, the way is open to estimate our chance of ob- 
taining them by negotiation. Let me ask on what ground you 
mean to treat. Do you expect to persuade ? Do you hope to 
intimidate ? If to persuade, what are your means of persuasion ? 
Every gentleman admits the importance of this country. Think 
you the first consul, whose capacious mind embraces the globe, is 
alone ignorant of its value ? Is he a child whom you may win by 
a rattle to comply with your wishes ? Will you, like a nurse, sing 
to him a lullaby ? If you have no hope from fondling attentions and 
soothing sounds, what have you to offer in exchange ? Have you 
any thing to give which he will take ? He wants power : you 
have no power. He wants dominion : you have no dominion ; at 
least none that you can grant. He wants influence in Europe. 
And have you any influence in Europe ? What, in the name of 
Heaven, are the means by which you would render this negotiation 
successful ? Is it by some secret spell ? Have you any magic 
powei Will you draw a circle, and conjure up devils to assist 
you ? Or do you rely on the charms of those beautiful girls with 
whom, the gentleman near me says, the French grenadiers are to 
incorporate ? If so, why do you not send an embassy of women ? 
Gentlemen talk of the principles of our government, as if they 
rould obtain for us the desired boon. But what will these princi- 



NAVIGATION OF THE MISSISSIPPI. 221 

pies avail ? When you inquire as to the force of France, Austria, 
or Russia, do you ask whether they have a habeas corpus act, or 
a trial by jury ? Do you estimate their power, discuss their inte- 
rior police ? No. The question is, How many battalions have 
they ? What train of artillery can they bring into the field ? 
How many ships can they send to sea? These are the important 
circumstances which command respect and facilitate negotiation. 
Can you display these powerful motives ? Alas ! Alas ! To all 
these questions you answer by one poor word — confidence — confi- 
dence — confidence — yea, verily, we have confidence. We have 
faith and hope ; ay, and we have charity too. Well — go to 
market with these Christian virtues, and what will you get for 
them ? Just nothing. Yet in the face of reason and experience 
you have confidence ; but in whom ? Why, in our worthy presi- 
dent. But he cannot make the treaty alone. There must be two 
parties to a bargain. I ask if you have confidence also in the first 
consul. But whither, in the name of Heaven, does this confidence 
lead, and to what does it tend ? The time is precious. We 
waste, and we have already wasted, moments which will never re- 
turn. You have already tried negotiation. I say, you have tried 
it, because I know you have a minister in France, and I am sure 
the first magistrate of our country cannot have been so negligent, 
as not to pay attention to a subject which is confessedly of such 
magnitude. You have, then, negotiated ; and with what success ? 
Why, instead of defeating the cession, you have closed the river. 
Instead of obtaining any advantage by a new treaty, you have lost 
the benefit of an old one. Such are the results of your negotia- 
tion in Europe. In this country, you have negotiated to get back 
the privilege you are robbed of ; and what follows ? A prohibition 
to touch their shores. Instead of restoring the rights of treaty, 
they cut you off from the rights of humanity. Such is your splen- 
did success from negotiation ; and yet gentlemen tell us we must 
continue to negotiate. The honorable member from Kentucky 
says, that great lengths are gone in inquiring into, and rectifying 
the irregular procedure. He tells us, a minister is just appointed, 
and it would, therefore, be inconsistent to fight just now ; that, 
moreover, it would degrade the president's authority, and defeat his 
measures. The gentleman from Georgia says, we have no right 
to go to war till there shall be a refusal on the part of Spain ; and 
my honorable colleague assures us, that if our wrongs are redress- 
ed by negotiation, we can have no complaint. As to the lengths 
which are gone, it is for those gentlemen to appreciate their value, 
who know what they are. I profess my ignorance, and, judging by 
effects, must withhold my confidence. If we must wait for a 
pointed refusal, before we do ourselves right, I venture to predict 
19* 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH ON THE 



a delay fatal to the peace of this country. But, sir, what is it we 
are to ask, the refusal of which will justify war ? Is it (as my 
honorable colleague supposes) a mere restitution of a privilege 
wrongfully taken away ? Sir, I answer in the words of the reso- 
lutions moved by my friend: "It does not consist with the digni- 
ty of this country to hold a right so important by a tenure so un- 
certain." But the honorable member from Maryland has told us, 
that we need not cross the Atlantic to seek for precedents ; that we 
have enough on our own archives ; and he has had the goodness 
to mention our humble petitions presented to the king of Great 
Britain in 1775. We sent, says he, petition after petition. I am 
sure that honorable member has no wish that a minister should be 
sent to bear our humble petition to the footstool of the first con- 
sul's throne. But, sir, whether we treat or pray, it will end as it 
did in 1775, by war, unless we are determined to give up that in- 
dependence which we then fought to establish. Let us consider, 
a moment, the natural course of this negotiation. It is the inter- 
est of France to foster in us a hope from treaty, until she has put 
herself in a condition to frustrate all other hope. There can be 
no question, therefore, that she has avoided, and will avoid, a direct 
refusal. And as long as we are content to accept of smooth 
speeches, general assurances, vague assertions, and loose evasions, 
we shall have no want of that court currency. But why, it may 
be said, has she not already taken possession ? Because her ori- 
ginal plans have been greatly deranged. St. Domingo presented 
obstacles unexpected, and that enterprise must not be abandoned ; 
for though the island may not in itself be of much consequence — 
though it must be ruined before it can be conquered — yet conquer- 
ed it must be, for the world must continue to believe, that the first 
consul cannot fail in what he has undertaken. Much of his power 
rests on that opinion ; and it must, therefore, be maintained. But 
there are other incidents besides those of St. Domingo, which have 
had the same tendency. There followed, on the general peace, a 
serious discussion of the German indemnities ; then the affairs 
of Italy ; lately of Switzerland ; and during the whole mo- 
mentous period, it was doubtful how far England would bear a con- 
tinued invasion of the liberties of Europe. And it was evident, 
that, should the war recommence with England, the force sent to 
this country would be totally lost. It was- important, therefore, to 
gain time ; and for that very reason, we should have insisted on an 
immediate decision. Such, then, is the state of this treaty so 
fondly desired — a treaty by which we are to ask much and offer 
nothing — a negotiation in which we have no means to persuade. 
Have we any to intimidate ? Where is your public force ? You 
have none ; and seem resolved not to have or use any. My 



NAVIGATION OP THE MISSISSIPPI. 



223 



honorable colleague tells us, that war will increase our debt one 
hundred millions, and that our people are not fond of taxes. He 
says we are trying a new experiment to pay our debts in a given 
period, which war would derange. It would injure, moreover, our 
pacific character, and might draw down the jealousy of all nations 
who have colonies. He believes that three fourths of our people 
are opposed to war : but yet he thinks that nine months hence we 
shall be in a better condition. What is the effect of this language ? 
Is it not to convince the adverse party that he has nothing to fear 
from a refusal ? As to this experiment for the payment of our 
debts, whether it has the merit of novelty, I shall not inquire; but 
I am bold to assert, that the merit, be it what it may, is due to one 
of my worthy friends, who formerly administered our finances. 
The same plan, also, has been adopted by another great statesman 
(Mr. Pitt), who has for many years past provided regularly a fund 
to liquidate, in a given period, each debt which his nation has in- 
curred. But does England trust her safety to the protection 
of her sinking fund ? No. She has fifty thousand seamen em- 
ployed, and a hundred thousand soldiers. These form the shield 
of her defence. A gentleman near me has told us, that, in case 
of war, our mercantile capital is exposed in every part of the 
world. To this I answer, first, that the same objection will apply 
with equal weight upon any and every occasion. But further, I 
say, the argument is directly and completely against him. How 
does it stand? He admits that, if negotiation fails, he will draw 
the sword. He goes further, and says he will throw away the 
scabbard. Now, sir, it is clear that if we operate at once, notice 
may be given to our merchants. Advices may be sent in season 
to every sea. And here let me say, that it is a duty of the gov- 
ernment to apprize both our insurers and shippers of their danger- 
ous situation. It is unwise, as well as unjust, to lull them into a 
fatal security. But suppose the treaty shall fail, — and remember 
that the success or failure depends on Bonaparte, — he will weigh 
the present declarations, and act accordingly. He will commence 
a war on your commerce long before you know that war exists. 
I say, therefore, the argument is directly against the gentleman 
who used it. And here let me say one word on the comparative 
merits of the resolutions on your table. Those moved by my 
honorable friend give the president command not only of the mili- 
tia, but of the naval and military force. They place money at 
his disposal, and what is most important, they put it in 
his power to use these efficient means. The resolutions moved 
as an amendment, authorize, indeed, a call for a greater num- 
ber of militia ; but, when called, they can do nothing but con- 
sume their rations. There is no power to bring them into action, 



224 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH ON THE 



and of course the expense is useless, even for the purpose of 
influence. 

Having endeavored to show, that we have no hope from treaty, 
it only remains to consider the natural effect of taking an immedi- 
ate possession. Against this measure it has been said, that war, 
instead of giving relief, will absolutely shut up the Mississippi ; 
that a single seventy-four in the mouth of that river would stop 
it effectually. I believe, sir, it would not only stop, but turn it ; 
for a seventy-four would run aground and obstruct the channel. 
But what is the amount of these observations ? The gentlemen 
all agree, that if they cannot obtain their object without war, they 
will fight for it. The mischief they deprecate must therefore ar- 
rive, unless there be a well-grounded hope from treaty ; and the 
only difference is, that they are willing to take a longer term of 
sufferance, because they have a stronger expectation of relief 
without the exertion of force. I have no such expectation. I 
shall, therefore, proceed to consider what will follow, if we take 
possession without a previous alliance with Britain, or with such 
an alliance. I have heard it urged in conversation, that such al- 
liance should first be made, and, therefore, I think it proper to 
take up the subject in debate. I cannot, however, but remark on 
the different language now held from that which we heard a year 
ago. Then it was the fashion to say, we had nothing to do with 
other nations. And when a man of plain sense observed, that 
this disposition was of little avail, because other nations would have 
something to do with us ; and when the particular danger we now 
see was pointed out; O! then, to be sure, there was nothing to 
apprehend from our dear sister republic ! I censure no man for 
adopting other and wiser principles. I have no question, but that 
as gentlemen proceed in the business of government, they will see 
the folly of many other fanciful notions ; but I must entreat them 
not to fly from one extreme to the other. I hesitate not to give 
my opinion, that we ought to take possession without consulting 
Great Britain. And having done so, let us declare to France, 
that we mean to live with her in perfect amity. Let us offer 
every assistance in our power to conquer and preserve St. Do- 
mingo. Let us show her, that we have done an act of mere de- 
fence. Let us prove our pacific disposition by declaring, that we 
are under the tie of no obligation to her rival. To Spain let us 
hold a similar language. Let us point out her present danger, and 
demonstrate the utility of our possession. To both let us offer to 
relinquish our claims for spoliations on our commerce, and pay our 
own merchants. We can well afford to purchase with that price, 
a price paid to ourselves. Finally, if our representations do not 
produce the desired effect, let us tell them that we will ally our- 



NAVIGATION OF THE MISSISSIPPI. 225 



selves to England, and aid in the conquest of all their American 
dominions. Sir, this language will be listened to. Rely on it, 
that, under such circumstances, neither France nor Spain dare 
send hither a single regiment or a single ship. The existence of 
the British naval force will alone produce all the effect you could 
ask from its operation. But what are we to hope from a delay 
until an alliance shall be made ? What will be the stipulations of 
the treaty of alliance? These may be more or less onerous or 
pernicious. Certainly the British minister will not hazard the fate 
of his nation without the hope of some correspondent advantage. 
One stipulation is certain. We must agree to continue the war 
until a peace can be obtained by common consent ; and this is pre- 
cisely the stipulation which we ought not to make, if it can be 
avoided ; because we shall then be no longer masters of our exte- 
rior relations. To this it may be objected, that we cannot expect 
aid from Britain without a previous treaty. I ask what reliance 
you have for aid with treaty. The answer is, that it will be her 
interest. And, sir, it is her interest to give that aid without treaty. 

I have now gone through this tedious discussion. I have tres- 
passed on your patience more than I wished, although, from the 
lateness of the hour, much has been omitted of what I ought to 
have said. I have endeavored to show, that, under the existing 
circumstances, we are now actually at war, and have no choice 
but manly resistance or vile submission ; that the possession of 
this country by France is dangerous to other nations, but fata' to 
us ; that it forms a natural and necessary part of our empire ; that, 
to use the strong language of the gentleman near me, it is joined 
to us by the hand of the Almighty, and that we have no hope of 
obtaining it by treaty. If, indeed, there be any such hope, it 
must be by adopting the resolutions offered by my honorable 
friend. Sir, I wish for peace ; I wish the negotiation may suc- 
ceed, and therefore I strongly urge you to adopt these resolutions. 
But though you should adopt them, they alone will not insure 
success. I have no hesitation in saying, that you ought to have 
taken possession of New Orleans and the Floridas the instant 
your treaty was violated. You ought to do it now. Your rights 
are invaded : confidence in negotiation is vain : there is, therefore, 
no alternative but force. You are exposed to imminent present 
danger: you have the prospect of great future advantage : you are 
justified by the clearest principles of right : you are urged by the 
strongest motives of policy : you are commanded by every senti- 
ment of national dignity. Look at the conduct of America in her 
infant years. When there was no actual invasion of right, but 
only a claim to invade, she resisted the claim ; she spurned the 
insult. Did we then hesitate ? * Did we then wait for foreign 

F F 



226 



MR. MORRIS'S SPEECH ON THE- 



alliance ? No — animated with the spirit, warmed with the soul 
of freedom, we threw our oaths of allegiance in the face of our 
sovereign, and committed our fortunes and our fate to the God of 
battles. We then were subjects. We had not then attained 
to the dignity of an independent republic. We then had no rank 
among the nations of the earth. But we had the spirit which 
deserved that elevated station. And now that we have gained 
it, shall we fall from our honor ? 

Sir, I repeat to you that I wish for peace ; real, lasting, honor- 
able peace. To obtain and secure this blessing, let us, by a bold 
and decisive conduct, convince the powers of Europe that we are 
determined to defend our rights ; that we will not submit to in- 
sult ; that we will not bear degradation. This is the conduct 
which becomes a generous people. This conduct will command 
the respect of the world. Nay, sir, it may rouse all Europe to 
a proper sense of their situation. They see, that the balance 
of power, on which their liberties depend, is, if not destroyed, 
in extreme danger. They know that the dominion of France 
has been extended by the sword over millions who groan in 
the servitude of their new masters. These unwilling subjects 
are ripe for revolt. The empire of the Gauls is riot, like that of 
Rome, secured by political institutions. It may yet be broken. 
But whatever may be the conduct of others, let us act as becomes 
ourselves. I cannot believe, with my honorable colleague, that 
three fourths of America are opposed to vigorous measures. I 
cannot believe that they will meanly refuse to pay the sums need- 
ful to vindicate their honor and support their independence. Sir, 
this is a libel on the people of America. They will disdain sub- 
mission to the proudest sovereign on earth. They have not 
lost the spirit of '76. But, sir, if they are so base as to barter 
their rights for gold — if they are so vile that they will not de- 
fend their honor — they are unworthy of the rank they enjoy, 
and it is no matter how soon they are parcelled out among bet- 
ter masters. 

My honorable friend from Pennsylvania, in opening this debate, 
pledged himself and his friends to support the executive 'govern- 
ment if they would adopt a manly conduct. I have no hesita- 
tion to renew that pledge. Act as becomes America, and all 
America will be united in your support. What is our conduct? 
Do we endeavor to fetter and trammel the executive authority? 
Do we oppose obstacles ? Do we raise difficulties ? No. We 
are willing to commit into the hands of the chief magistrate the 
treasure, the power and the energies of the country. We ask for 
ourselves nothing. We expect nothing. All we ask is for our 
country. And although we do not believe in the success of 



NAVIGATION OF THE MISSISSIPPI. 



227 



treaty, yet the resolutions we move, and the language we hold, 
are calculated to prorruote it. 

I have now performed, to the best of my power, the great duty 
which I owed to my country. I have given that advice which in 
my soul I believe to be the best. But I have little hope that it 
will be adopted. I fear that, by feeble councils, we shall be ex- 
posed to a long and bloody war. This fear is, perhaps, ill found- 
ed ; and, if so, I shall thank God that I was mistaken. I know 
that, in the order of his providence, the wisest ends frequently 
result from the most foolish measures. It is our duty to submit 
ourselves to his high dispensations. I know that war, with all its 
misery, is not wholly without advantage. It calls forth the ener- 
gies of character ; it favors the manly virtues ; it gives elevation to 
sentiment ; it produces national union, generates patriotic love, and 
infuses a just sense of national honor. If, then, we are doomed 
to war, let us meet it as we ought ; and when the hour of trial 
comes, let it find us a band of brothers. 

Sir, I have done, and I pray to Almighty God that this day's 
debate may eventuate in the prosperity, the freedom, the peace, 
the power and the glory of our country. 



SPEECH OF JOHN RANDOLPH. 



MARCH 5, 1806, 



IN COMMITTEE OP THE WHOLE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

ON 

MR. GREGG'S RESOLUTION TO PROHIBIT THE IM 
PORTATION OF BRITISH GOODS INTO 
THE UNITED STATES. 



I am extremely afraid, sir, that so far as it may depend on my 
acquaintance with details connected with the subject, I have very 
little right to address you, for in truth I have not yet seen the doc- 
uments from the treasury, which were called for some time ago, 
to direct the judgment of this house, in the decision of the ques- 
tion now before you ; and, indeed, after what I have this day 
heard, I no longer require that document or any other document 
— indeed f do not know that I ever should have required it — to 
vote on the resolution of the gentleman from Pennsylvania. If I 
had entertained any doubts, they would have been removed by 
the style in which the friends of the resolution have this morning 
discussed it. I am perfectly aware, that on entering upon this 
subject, we go into it manacled — handcuffed and tongue-tied. 
Gentlemen know that our lips are sealed, on subjects of momen- 
tous foreign relations, which are indissolubly linked with the pres- 
ent question, and which would serve to throw a great light upon 
it, in every respect relevant to it. I will, however, endeavor to 
hobble over the subject, as well as my fettered limbs and palsied 
tongue will enable me to do it. I am not surprised to hear this 
resolution discussed by its friends as a war measure. They say 
(it is true) that it is not a war measure ; but they defend it on 
principles which would justify none but war measures, and seem 
pleased with the idea that it may prove the forerunner of war 
If war is necessary — if we have reached this point — let us have 
war But while I have life, I will never consent to these incipi- 
ent war measures, which, in their commencement, breathe nothing 
but peace, though they plunge us at last into war. It has been 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH, &c. 



229 



well observed by the gentleman from Pennsylvania behind me 
(Mr. J. Clay), that the situation of this nation, in 1793, was in 
every respect different from that in which it finds itself in 1806. 
Let me ask, too, if the situation of England is not since materially 
changed. Gentlemen, who, it would appear from their language, 
have not got beyond the hornbook of politics, talk of our ability 
to cope with the British navy, and tell us of the war of our rev- 
olution. What was the situation of Great Britain then ? She 
was then contending for the empire of the British channel, barely 
able to maintain a doubtful equality with her enemies, over whom 
she never gained the superiority until Rodney's victory of the 12th 
of April. What is her present situation ? The combined fleets 
of France, Spain, and Holland are dissipated ; they no longer ex- 
ist. I am not surprised to hear men advocate these wild opin- 
ions, to see them goaded on by a spirit of mercantile avarice, 
straining their feeble strength to excite the nation to war, when 
they have reached this stage of infatuation that we are an over- 
match for Great Britain on the ocean. It is mere waste of time 
to reason with such persons. They do not deserve any thing like 
serious refutation. The prqper arguments for such statesmen are 
a straight waistcoat, a dark room, water gruel, and depletion. 

It has always appeared to me that there are three points to be 
considered, and maturely considered, before we can be prepared 
to vote for the resolution of the gentleman from Pennsylvania. 
First. Our ability to contend with Great Britain for the question 
in dispute. Secondly. The policy of such a contest ; and Third- 
ly, in case both of these shall be settled affirmatively, the manner 
in which we can, with the greatest effect, react upon and annoy 
our adversary. 

Now the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Crowninshield) 
has settled, at a single sweep — to use a favorite expression of late, 
— not only that we are capable of contending with Great Britain on 
the ocean, but that we are actually her superior. Whence does 
the gentleman deduce this inference? Because, truly, at that 
time when Great Britain was not mistress of the ocean, when a 
North was her prime minister, and a Sandwich the first lord of her 
admiralty, when she was governed by a counting-house adminis- 
tration, privateers of this country trespassed on her commerce. 
So, too, did the cruisers of Dunkirk. At that day Suffrein held 
the mastery of the Indian seas. But what is the case now? Do 
gentlemen remember the capture of Cornwallis on land, because 
De Grasse maintained the dominion of the ocean ? To my mind 
no position is more clear, than if we go to war with Great Britain. 
Charleston and Boston, the Chesapeake and the Hudson, will be 
invested by British squadrons. Will you call on the count De 
Grasse to relieve them, or shall we apply to admiral Gravina, or 
20 



230 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH ON 



admiral Villeneuve to raise the blockade? But you have not only 
a prospect of gathering glory, and what seems to the gentleman 
from Massachusetts much dearer, profit, by privateering, but you 
will be able to make a conquest of Canada and Nova Scotia. In- 
deed ? Then, sir, we shall catch a Tartar. I confess, however, I 
nave no desire to see the senators and representatives of the Ca- 
nadian French, or of the tories and refugees of Nova Scotia, sit- 
ting on this floor, or that of the other house ; to see them becom- 
ing members of the union, and participating equally in our polit- 
ical rights. And on what other principle would the gentleman 
from Massachusetts be for incorporating these provinces with us ; 
or on what other principle could it be done, under the constitu- 
tion ? If the gentleman has no other bounty to offer us for going 
to war, than the incorporation of Canada and Nova Scotia with 
the United States, I am for remaining at peace. 

What is the question in dispute ? The carrying trade. What 
part of it ? The fair, the honest, and the useful trade, that is en- 
gaged in carrying our own productions to foreign markets, and 
bringing back their productions in exchange ? No, sir ; — it is that 
carrying trade which covers enemy's property, and carries the cof- 
Tee, the sugar, and other West India products, to the mother coun- 
try. No, sir ; if this great agricultural nation is to be governed by 
Salem and Boston, by New York and Philadelphia, and Balti- 
more and Norfolk and Charleston, let gentlemen come out and 
say so ; and let a committee of public safety be appointed from 
those towns to carry on the government. I, for one, will not 
mortgage my property and my liberty to carry on this trade. The 
nation said so seven years ago — I said so then, and I say so now. 
It is not for the honest carrying trade of America, but for this 
mushroom, this fungus of war — for a trade which, as soon as the 
nations of Europe are at peace, will no longer exist ; it is for this 
that the spirit of avaricious traffic would plunge us into war. I 
am forcibly struck on this occasion by the recollection of a remark 
made by one of the ablest (if not the honestest) ministers that 
England ever produced ; — I mean sir Robert Walpole, who said 
that the country gentlemen (poor, weak souls !) came up every 
year to be sheared- — that they lay mute and patient whilst their 
fleeces were taking off — but if he touched a single bristle of the 
commercial interest, the whole sty was in an uproar. It was in- 
deed shearing the hog — " great cry and little wool." 

But we are asked, Are we willing to bend the neck to England ; 
to submit to her outrages ? No, sir ; I answer that it will be time 
enough for us to tell gentlemen what we will do to avenge the vi- 
olation of our flag on the ocean, when they shall have told us 
what they have done, in resentment of the violation of the actual 
territory of the United States by Spain ; the true territory of the 



THE NON-IMPORTATION ACT. *23J 

United States, not your new-fangled country over the Mississippi, 
but the good old United States ; part of Georgia, of the old thirteen 
states, where citizens have been taken, not from our ships, but 
from our actual territory. When gentlemen have taken the pad- 
lock from our mouths, I shall be ready to tell them what I will do 
relative to our dispute with Britain, on the law of nations, on con- 
traband and such stuff. 

I have another objection to this course of proceeding. Great 
Britain, when she sees it, will say, the American people have 
great cause of dissatisfaction with Spain. She will see by the 
documents furnished by the president that Spain has outraged our 
territory, pirated upon our commerce, and imprisoned our citizens ; 
and she will inquire what we have done. It is true she will re- 
ceive no answer ; but she must know what we have not done. 
She will see that we have not repelled these outrages, nor made 
any addition to our army or navy; nor even classed the militia. 
No, sir, not one of your militia generals in politics (looking at 
general Varnum) has marshalled a single brigade. 

Although I have said it would be time enough to answer the 
question which gentlemen have put to me, when they shall have 
answered mine, yet as I do not like long prorogations, I will give 
them an answer now. I will never consent to go to war for that 
which I cannot protect. I deem it no sacrifice of dignity to say 
to the leviathan of the deep, — " We are unable to contend with 
you in your own element ; but if you come within our actual limits, 
we will shed our last drop of blood in their defence." In such an 
event I would feel, not reason, and obey an impulse which never 
has — -which never can — deceive me. 

France is at war with England — suppose her power on the 
continent of Europe no greater than it is on the ocean. How 
would she make her enemy feel it ? There would be a perfect 
non-conductor between them. So with the United States and 
England : — she scarcely presents to us a vulnerable point. Her 
commerce is now carried on for the most part in fleets ; when in 
single ships, they are stout and well armed — very different from 
the state of her trade during the American war, when her mer- 
chantmen became the prey of paltry privateers. Great Britain 
has been too long at war with the three most powerful maritime 
nations of Europe, not to have learned how to protect her trade. 
She can afford convoy to it all ; she has eight hundred ships in 
commission : the navies of her enemies are annihilated. Thus 
this war has presented the new and curious political spectacle of a 
regular annual increase (and to an immense amount) of her imports 
and exports, and tonnage and revenue, and all the insignia of accu- 
mulating wealth, whilst in every former war, without exception, 
these have suffered a greater or less diminution. And wherefore J 



232 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH ON 



Because she has driven France, Spain, and Holland from the 
ocean. Their marine is no more. [ verily believe that ten Eng- 
lish ships of the line would not decline a meeting with the com- 
bined fleets of those nations. I forewarn the gentleman from 
Massachusetts, and his constituents of Salem, that all their golden 
hopes are vain. I forewarn them of the exposure of their trade 
beyond the Cape of Good Hope (or now doubling it) to capture 
and confiscation — of their unprotected seaport towns, exposed to 
contribution or bombardment. Are we to be legislated into a war 
by a set of men who, in six weeks after its commencement, may 
be compelled to take refuge with us up in the country ? And for 
what ? a mere fungus — a mushroom production of war in Europe, 
which wilLdisappear with the first return of peace — an unfair trade. 
For is there a man so credulous as to believe that we possess a 
capital not only equal to what may be called our own proper trade, 
but large enough also to transmit to the respective parent states 
the vast and wealthy products of the French, Spanish and Dutch 
colonies ? 'Tis beyond the belief of any rational being. But this 
is not my only objection to entering upon this naval warfare. I 
am averse to a naval war with any nation whatever. I was opposed 
to the naval war of the last administration, and I am as ready 
to oppose a naval war of the present administration, should they 
meditate such a measure. What ! shall this great mammoth of 
the American forest leave his native element, and plunge into the 
water in a mad contest with the shark? Let him beware that his 
proboscis is not bitten off in the engagement. Let him stay on 
shore, and not be excited, by the muscles and periwinkles on the 
strand, or political bears in a boat, to venture on the perils of the 
deep. Gentlemen say, Will you not protect your violated rights? 
and I say, Why take to water, where you can neither fight nor 
swim ? Look at France ; see her vessels stealing from port to port 
on her coast, and remember that she is the first military power of 
the earth, and as a naval people second only to England. Take 
away the British navy, and France to-morrow is the tyrant of 
the ocean. 

This brings me to the second point. How far is it politic in the 
United States to throw their weight into the scale of France at 
this moment ; — from whatever motive, to aid the views of her gi- 
gantic ambition — to make her mistress of the sea and land — to 
jeopard the liberties of mankind? Sir, you may help to crush 
Great Britain, you may assist in breaking down her naval dominion ; 
but you cannot succeed to it. The iron sceptre of the ocean wilt 
pass into his hands who wears the iron crown of the land. You 
may then expect a new code of maritime law. Where will you 
look for redress ? I can tell the gentleman from Massachusetts 
that there is nothing in his rule of three that will save us, even 



THE NON-IMPORTATION ACT. 



233 



although he should outdo himself and exceed the financial ingenui- 
ty which he so memorably displayed on a recent occasion.* No, 
sir. — Let the battle of Actium be once fought, and the whole line 
of sea-coast will be at the mercy of the conqueror. The Atlantic, 
deep and wide as it is, will prove just as good a barrier against his 
ambition, if directed against you, as the Mediterranean to the power 
of the Ceesars. Do I mean (when I say so) to crouch to the in- 
vader? No. I will meet him at the water's edge, and fight every 
inch of ground from thence to the mountains, from the mountains 
to the Mississippi. But after tamely submitting to an outrage on 
your domicil, will you bully and look big at an insult on your flag 
three thousand miles off? 

But, sir, I have a yet more cogent reason against going to war, 
for the honor of the flag in the narrow seas, or any other maritime 
punctilio. It springs from my attachment to the principles of the 
government under which I live. I declare in the face of day that 
this government was not instituted for the purposes of offensive 
war. No. It was framed (to use its own language) for the com- 
mon defence and the general welfare, which are inconsistent with 
offensive war. I call that offensive war, which goes out of juris- 
diction and limits for the attainment or protection of objects not 
within those limits and that jurisdiction. As in 1798 I was op- 
posed to this species of warfare, because I believed it would raze 
the constitution to the very foundation, so in 1806 am I opposed 
to it, and on the same grounds. No sooner do you put the con- 
stitution to this use, to a test, which it is by no means calculated 
to endure, than its incompetency to such purposes becomes mani- 
fest and apparent to all. I fear if you go. into a foreign war for a 
circuitous, unfair carrying trade, you will come out without your 
constitution. Have not you contractors enough yet in this house? 
Or do you want to be overrun and devoured by commissaries and 
dll the vermin of contract ? I fear, sir, that what are called the 
energy men will rise up again — men who will burn the parchment. 
We shall be told that our government is too free — or, as they 
would say, weak and inefficiejit. Much virtue, sir, in terms. That 
we must give the president power to call forth the resources of the 
nation — that is, to filch the last shilling from our pockets, to drain 
the last drop of blood from our veins. I am against giving this 
power to any man, be he who he may. The American people 
must either withhold this power, or resign their liberties. There is 

* In a debate on a bill fixing the prices which the commissioners of the sin* 
ing fund should not exceed, in their purchases of public debts, Mr. Crownin 
shield had asserted, that three per cent, were worth only half as much as the 
sixes ; in other words, that the value of the stocks was in the ratio of their 
respective rates of interest, and not compounded of principal and interest. — 
Thus, if the 3 per cent, are at 60, the true value of the 6 per cent, would be 
120, and of the 8 per cent. 160, according to this novel financial discoveiy. 

20 * Gg 



234 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH ON 



no other alternative. Nothing but the most imperious necessity 
will justify such a grant. And is there a powerful enemy at our 
doors ? You may begin with a first consul,— from that chrysalis 
state he soon becomes an emperor. You have your choice. It 
depends upon your election, whether you will be a free, happy and 
united people at home, or the light of your executive majesty 
shall beam across the Atlantic in one general blaze of the public 
liberty. 

For my part, I never will go to war but in self-defence. I have 
no desire for conquests, no ambition to possess Nova Scotia. I 
hold the liberties of this people at a higher rate. Much more am 
I indisposed to war, when, among the first means for carrying it on, 
I see gentlemen .propose the confiscation of debts due by govern- 
ment to individuals. Does a bona fide creditor know who holds 
his paper ? Dare any honest man ask himself the question ? 
'Tis hard to say whether such principles are more detestably dis- 
honest than they are weak and foolish. What, sir, will you go about 
with proposals for opening a loan in one hand, and a sponge for the 
national debt in the other ? If. on a late occasion, you could not 
borrow at a less rate of interest than 8 per cent., when the govern- 
ment avowed that they would pay to the last shilling of the pub- 
lic ability, at what price do you expect to raise money with an 
avowal of these nefarious opinions? God help you ! if these are 
your ways and means for carrying on war — if your finances are in 
the hands of such a chancellor of the exchequer. Because a 
man can take an observation and keep a log-book and a reckoning, 
can navigate a cockboat to the West Indies or the East, shall he 
aspire to navigate the great vessel of state ?- — to stand at the helm 
of public councils ? JVe sutor ultra crepidam. What are you 
going to war for ? For the carrying trade. Already you possess 
seven eighths of it. What is the object in dispute ? The fair, 
honest trade that exchanges the product of our soil for foreign 
articles for home consumption ? Not at all. You are called upon 
to sacrifice this necessary branch of your navigation and the great 
agricultural interest, whose handmaid it is, — to jeopard your best 
interest for a circuitous commerce, for the fraudulent protection of 
belligerent property under your neutral flag. Will you be goaded 
by the dreaming calculation of insatiate avarice to stake your all 
for the protection of this trade ? I do not speak of the probable 
effects of war on the price of our produce. Severely as we must 
feel, we may scuffle through it. I speak of its reaction on the 
constitution. You may go to war for this excrescence of the car- 
tying trade— and make peace at the expense of the constitution. 
Your executive will lord it over you. and you must make the best 
Lerm.7. with the conqueror that you can. But the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Gregg) tells you that he is for acting in this 



THE NON-IMPORTATION ACT. 



235 



as in all things, uninfluenced by the opinion of any minister 
whatever — foreign, or, I presume, domestic. On this point I am 
ready to meet the gentleman, am unwilling as he can be, to be 
dictated to by any minister at home or abroad. Is he willing to act 
on the same independent footing ? I have before protested, and I 
again protest against secret, irresponsible, overruling influence. 
The first question i asked when I saw the gentleman's resolution was, 
"Is this a measure of the cabinet?" Not of an open, declared 
cabinet, but of an invisible, inscrutable, unconstitutional cabinet, 
without responsibility, unknown to the constitution. I speak of 
back-stairs influence — of men who bring messages to this house, 
which, although they do not appear on the journals, govern its de- 
cisions. Sir, the first question that I asked on the subject of British 
relations was, What is the opinion of the cabinet ? What measures 
will they recommend to congress? (well knowing that what- 
ever measures we might take, they must execute them, and there- 
fore that we should have their opinion on the subject. (My 
answer was (and from a cabinet minister too), " There is no cabi- 
net" Subsequent circumstances, sir, have given me a personal 
knowledge of the fact. It needs no commentary. 

But the gentleman has told you that we ought to go to war, if 
for nothing else, for the fur trade. Now, sir, the people on whose 
support he seems to calculate, follow (let me tell him) a better 
business, and let me add, that whilst men are happy at home reap- 
ing their own fields, the fruits of their labor and industry, there is 
little danger of their being induced to go sixteen or seventeen 
hundred miles in pursuit of beavers, raccoons or opossums— much 
less of going to war for the privilege. They are better employed 
where they are. This trade, sir, may be important to Britains, to 
nations who have exhausted every resource of industry at home, 
bowed down by taxation and wretchedness. Let them, in God's 
name, if they please, follow the fur trade^ They may, for me, 
catch every beaver in North America. Yes, sir, our people have 
a better occupation — a safe, profitable, honorable employment. 
Whilst they should be engaged in distant regions in hunting the bea- 
ver, they dread but those, whose natural prey they are, should begin 
to hunt them, should pillage their property, and assassinate their 
constitution. Give up these wild schemes, — pay off your debt, and 
do not prate about its confiscation. Do not, I beseech you, expose 
at once your knavery and your folly. You have more lands than 
you know what to do with ; you have lately paid fifteen millions 
for yet more. Go and work them — and cease to alarm the people 
with the cry of Wolf! until they become deaf to your voice, or 
at least laugh at you. 

Mr. Chairman, if I felt less regard for what I deem the best in- 
terest of this nation, than for my own reputation, I should not on 



236 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH ON 



this day have offered to address you, but would have waited to 
come out, bedecked with flowers and boquets of rhetoric, in a set 
speech. But, sir, I dreaded lest a tone might be given to the mind 
of the committee — they will pardon me, but I did fear, from all 
that I could see, or hear, that, they might be prejudiced by its advo- 
cates (under pretence of protecting our commerce) in favor of 
this ridiculous and preposterous project, — I rose, sir, for one, to 
plead guilty — to declare in the face of day, that I will not go to 
war for this carrying trade. I will agree to pass for an idiot if this 
is not the public sentiment, and you will find it to your cost, begin 
the war when you will. 

Gentlemen talk of 1793. They might as well go back to the 
Trojan war. What was your situation then ? Then every heart 
beat high with sympathy for France, for Republican France ! 1 
am not prepared to say, with my friend from Pennsylvania, that 
we were ail ready to draw our swords in her cause ; but I affirm that 
we were prepared to go great lengths. I am not ashamed to pay 
this compliment to the hearts of the American people, even if at 
the expense of their understandings. It was a noble and gener- 
ous sentiment, which nations, like individuals, are never the worse 
for having felt. They were, I repeat it, ready to make great sac- 
rifices for France. And why ready ? Because she was fighting 
the battles of the human race against the combined enemies of 
their liberty ; because she was performing the part which Great 
Britain now in fact sustains, forming the only bulwark against uni- 
versal dominion. Knock away her navy, and where are you ? 
Under the naval despotism of France, unchecked and unqualified 
by any antagonizing military power, at best but a change of mas- 
ters. The tyrant of the ocean, and the tyrant of the land, is one 
and the same, lord of all ; and " who shall say him nay, or 
wherefore dost thou this thing ? " Give to the tiger the proper- 
ties of the shark, and, there is no longer safety for the beasts of 
the forest or the fishes of the sea. Where was this . high anti- 
Britannic spirit of the gentleman from Pennsylvania when his vote 
would have put an end to the British treaty, that pestilent source 
of evil to this country ? and at a time, too, when it was not less 
the interest than the sentiment of this people to pull down Great 
Britain and exalt France. Then, when the gentleman might have 
acted with effect, he could not screw his courage to the sticking 
place. Then England was combined in what has proved a feeble, 
inefficient coalition, but which gave just cause of alarm to every 
friend of freedom. Now the liberties of the human race are 
threatened by a single power, more formidable than the coalesced 
world, to whose utmost ambition, vast as it is, the naval force of 
Great Britain forms the only obstacle. 

1 im perfectly sensible and ashamed of the trespass I am making 



THE NON-IMPORTATION ACT. 



237 



on the patience of the committee, but as I know not whether it 
will be in my power to trouble them again on this subject, I must 
beg leave to continue my crude and desultory observations. I am 
not ashamed to confess that they are so. 

At the commencement of this session we received a printed 
message from the president of the United States, breathing a great 
deal of national honor and indignation at the outrages we had en- 
dured, particularly from Spain. She was specially named and 
pointed at; she had pirated upon your commerce, imprisoned your 
citizens, violated your actual territory, invaded the very limits 
solemnly established between the two nations by the treaty of San 
Lorenzo. Some of the state legislatures (among others the very 
state on which the gentleman from Pennsylvania relies for support) 
sent forward resolutions pledging their lives, their fortunes, and 
their sacred honors, in support of any measures you might take in 
vindication of your injured rights. Well, sir, what have you 
done ? You have resolutions laid upon your table — gone to some 
expense of printing and stationery — mere pen, ink and paper, and 
that's all. Like true political quacks, you deal only in handbills 
and nostrums. Sir, I blush to see the record of our proceedings ; 
they resemble nothing but the advertisement of patent medicines. 
Here you have, " the Worm-Destroying Lozenges ; " there, 
" Church's Cough Drops," and, to crown the whole, " Sloan's Ve- 
getable Specific," an infallible remedy for all nervous disorders and 
vertigoes of brain-sick politicians ; each man earnestly adjuring 
you to give his medicine only a fair trial. If, indeed, these wonder- 
working nostrums could perform but one half of what they promise, 
there is little danger of our dying a political death at this time, at 
least. But, sir, in politics as in physic, the doctor is ofttimes the 
most dangerous disease : and this I take to be our case at present. 

But, sir, why do I talk of Spain ? there are no longer Pyrenees. 
There exists no such nation, no such being as a Spanish king or 
minister. It is a mere juggle played off for the benefit of those 
who put the mechanism into motion. You know, sir, that you 
have no differences with Spain; that she is the passive tool of a 
superior power, to whom at this moment you are crouching. Are 
your differences indeed with Spain ? And where are you going to 
send your political panacea (resolutions and handbills excepted), 
your sole arcanum of government, your king-cure-all ? — To Ma- 
drid ? No — you are not such quacks as not to know where t he 
shoe pinches — to Paris. You know at least where the disease lies, 
and there you apply your remedy. When the nation anxiously 
demands the result of your deliberation, you hang your head and 
blush to tell. You are afraid to tell. Your mouth is hermeti- 
cally sealed. Your honor has received a wound which must not 
take air. Gentlemen dare not come forward and avow their work 



23S 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH ON 



much less defend it in the presence of the nation. Give them all 
they ask, that Spain exists, and what then ? After shrinking from 
the Spanish jackall, do you presume to bully the British lion ? But 
here the secret comes out. Britain is your rival in trade, and 
governed, as you are, by counting-house politicians, you would 
sacrifice the paramount interests of the country, to wound that 
rival. For Spain and France you are carriers — and from good 
customers every indignity is to be endured. And what is the 
nature of this trade ? Is it that carrying-trade which sends abroad 
the flour, tobacco, cotton, beef, pork, fish and lumber of this coun- 
try, and brings back in return foreign articles necessary for our ex- 
istence or comfort? No, sir; 'tis a trade carried on, the Lord 
knows where, or by whom ; now doubling Cape Horn, now the 
Cape of Good Hope. I do not say that there is no profit in it — 
for it would not then be pursued — but 'tis a trade that tends to as- 
similate our manners and government to those of the most corrupt 
countries of Europe — yes, sir, and when a question of great 
national magnitude presents itself to you, causes those who now 
prate about national honor and spirit, to pocket any insult, to con- 
sider it as a mere matter of debit and credit, a business of profit 
and loss, and nothing else. 

The first thing that struck my mind when this resolution was 
laid on the table was, Unde derivatur? a question often put to us 
at school, Whence comes it? Is this only the putative father of 
the bantling he is taxed to maintain, or indeed the actual parent, 
the real progenitor of the child ? or is it the production of the 
cabinet? But I knew you had no cabinet, no system. I had 
seen despatches relating to vital measures, laid before you the day 
after your final decision on those measures, — four weeks after they 
were received — not only their contents, but their very existence, 
all that time unsuspected and unknown to men whom the peo- 
ple fondly believe assist with their wisdom and experience at every 
important deliberation of government. Do you believe that this 
system, or rather this no system, will do? I am free to answer it 
will not. It cannot last. 1 am not so afraid of the fair, open, consti- 
tutional, responsible influence of government ; but I shrink intuitively 
from this left-handed, invisible, irresponsible influence, which defies 
the touch, but pervades and decides every thing. Let the execu- 
tive come forward to the legislature ; let us see whilst we feel it. 
If we cannot rely on its wisdom, is it any disparagement to the 
gentieman from Pennsylvania to say that I cannot rely upon him ? 
No, sir ; he has mistaken his talent. He is not the Palinurus, on 
whose skill the nation, at this trying moment, can repose their con- 
fidence. I wilt have nothing to do with his paper — much less 
will I endorse it and make myself responsible for its goodness ; 1 
will not put my name to it. I assert that there is no cabinet nor 



THE NON-IMPORTATION ACT. 



239 



system, no plan. That which I believe in one place, I shall never 
hesitate to say in another. This is no time, no place for mincing 
our words. The people have a right to know, they shall know 
the state of their affairs, at least as far as I am at liberty to com- 
municate them. I speak from personal knowledge. Ten days 
ago there had been no consultation, there existed no opinion in 
your executive department, at least none that was avowed ; on 
the contrary, there was an express disavowal of any opinion 
whatsoever on the great subject before you, and I have good rea- 
son for saying that none has been formed since. Some time ago a 
book was laid on our table, which, like some other bantlings, did 
not bear the name of its father. Here I was taught to expect a 
solution of all doubts, an end to all our difficulties. If, sir, I were 
the foe, as I trust I am the friend to this nation, I would exclaim, 
" O that mine enemy would write a book." At the very outset, 
in the very first page, I believe, there is a complete abandonment 
of the principle in dispute. Has any gentleman got the work ? 
[It was handed by one of the members.] The first position taken 
is the broad principle of the unlimited freedom of trade between 
nations at peace, which the writer endeavors to extend to the 
trade between a neutral and belligerent power, accompanied, how- 
ever, by this acknowledgment — " Rut inasmuch as the trade of a 
neutral with a belligerent nation might, in certain special cases, 
affect the safety of its antagonist, usage founded on the principle 
of necessity, has admitted a few exceptions to the general rule." 
Whence comes the doctrine of contraband, blockade, and enemy's 
property ? Now, sir, for what does that celebrated pamphlet, 
" War in Disguise," which is said to have been written under the 
eye of the British prime minister, contend, but this " principle of 
necessity ? " And this ground is abandoned by this pamphleteer at 
the very threshold of the discussion. But, as if this were not 
enough, he goes on to assign as a reason for not referring to the 
authority of the ancients, that " the great change which has taken 
place in the state of manners, in the maxims of war, and in the 
course of commerce, make it pretty certain " (what degree of cer- 
tainty is this ?) " that either nothing will be found relating to the 
question, or nothing sufficiently applicable to deserve attention in 
deciding it." Here, sir, as an apology of the writer for not dis- 
closing the whole extent of his learning (which might have over- 
whelmed the reader), is the admission that a change of circum- 
stances (" in the course of commerce ") has made (and therefore 
will now justify) a total change of the law of nations. What more 
could the most inveterate advocate of English usurpation demand ? 
What else can they require to establish all, and even more than 
they contend for? Sir, there is a class of men — we know them 
very well — who, if you only permit them to lay the foundation, 



240 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH, &c. 



will build you up step by step, and brick by brick, very neat and 
showy, if not tenable arguments. To detect them, 'tis only neces- 
sary to watch their premises, where you will often find the point 
at issue totally surrendered, as in this case it is. Again, is the 
mare liberum any where asserted in this book ? that free ships 
make free goods ? — No, sir ; the right of search is acknowledged ; 
that enemy's property is lawful prize is sealed and delivered. 
And after abandoning these principles, what becomes of the doctrine 
that a mere shifting of the goods from one sbip to another, the 
touching at another port, changes the property ? Sir, give up this 
principle, and there is an end of the question. 



SPEECH OF JOSIAH QUINCY, 



IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES 
NOVEMBER 28, 1808, 



On the following Resolution, "Resolved, that the United States cannot, 
without a sacrifice of their rights, honor, and independence, submit to 
the late edicts of Great Britain and France." 



Mr. Chairman, 

1 am not, in general, a friend to abstract legislation. Ostenta- 
tious declaration of general principles is so often the resort of 
weakness and of ignorance ; it is so frequently the subterfuge of 
men who are willing to amuse, or who mean to delude the people, 
that it is with great reluctance I yield to such a course my sanc- 
tion. If, however, a formal annunciation of a determination to 
perform one of the most common and undeniable of national du- 
ties be deemed, by a majority of this house, essential to their 
character, or to the attainment of public confidence, I am willing 
to admit, that the one now offered is as unexceptionable as any it 
would be likely to propose. 

In this view, however, I lay wholly out of sight the report of 
the committee, by which it is accompanied and introduced. The 
course advocated in that report is, in my opinion, loathsome ; the 
spirit it breathes disgraceful ; the temper it is likely to inspire, 
neither calculated to regain ' the rights we have lost, nor to pre- 
serve those which remain to us. It is an established maxim, 
that, in adopting a resolution offered by a committee in this house, 
no member is pledged to support the reasoning, or made sponsor 
for the facts which they have seen fit to insert in it. I exercise, 
therefore, a common right, when I subscribe to the resolution, not 
on the principles of the committee, but on those which obviously 
result from its terms, and are the plain meaning of its expressions. 

• I agree to this resolution, because, in my apprehension, it offers 
a solemn pledge to this nation ; — a pledge not to be mistaken, and 
not to be evaded, that the present system of public measures 
shall be totally abandoned. Adopt it, and there is an end of the 
policy of deserting our rights, under a pretence of maintaining 
them. Adopt it, and we no longer yield to the beck of haughty 
21 H h 



242 



MR. QUINCY'S SPEECH, 



belligerents the rights of navigating the ocean — that choice inher- 
itance bequeathed to us by our fathers. Adopt it, and there is a 
termination of that base and abject submission, by which this 
country has for these eleven months been disgraced and brought 
to the brink of ruin. 

That the natural import and necessary implication of the terms 
of this resolution are such as I have suggested, will be apparent 
from a very transient consideration. What do its terms necessa- 
rily include ? They contain an assertion and a pledge. The as- 
sertion is, that the edicts of Great Britain and France are contrary 
to our rights, honor, and independence. The pledge is, that we 
will not submit to them. 

Concerning the assertion contained in this resolution, I would 
say nothing, were it not that I fear that those who have so long 
been in the habit of looking at the orders and decrees of foreign 
powers, as the measure of the rights of our own citizens, and have 
been accustomed, in direct subserviency to them, of prohibiting 
commerce altogether, might apprehend that there was some lurk- 
ing danger in such an assertion. They may be assured there can 
be nothing more harmless. Neither Great Britain nor France ever 
pretended that those edicts were consistent with American rights. 
On the contrary, both these nations ground those edicts on the 
principle of imperious necessity, which admits the injustice done, 
at the very instant of executing the act of oppression. No gen- 
tleman need have any difficulty in screwing his courage up to this 
assertion. Neither of the belligerents will contradict it. Mr. 
Turreau and Mr. Erskine will both of them countersign the dec- 
laration to-morrow. 

With respect to the pledge, contained in this resolution, under- 
stood according to its true import, it is a glorious one. It opens 
new prospects. It promises a change in the disposition of this 
house. It is a solemn assurance to the nation, that it will no 
longer submit to these edicts. It remains for us, therefore, to 
consider what submission is, and what the pledge not to sub- 
mit implies. 

One man submits to the order, decree, or edict of another, 
when he does that thing which such order, decree, or edict com- 
mands ; or when he omits to do that thing, which such order, de- 
cree, or edict prohibits. This, then, is submission. It is to do 
as we are bidden. It is to take the will of another as the measure 
of our rights. It is to yield to his power ; to go where he directs, 
or to refrain from going where he forbids us. 

If this be submission, then the pledge not to submit implies the 
reverse of all this. It is a solemn declaration, that we will not do 
that thing which such order, decree, or edict commands, or that 
we will do what it prohibits. This, then, is freedom. This is 



ON FOREIGN RELATIONS. 



243 



honor. This is independence. It consists in taking the nature 
of things, and not the will of another, as the measure of our rights. 
What God and nature has offered us, we will enjoy in despite of 
the commands, regardless of the menaces of iniquitous power. 

Let us apply these correct and undeniable principles to the 
edicts of Great Britain and France, and the consequent abandon- 
ment of the ocean by the American government. The decrees 
of France prohibit us from trading with Great Britain. The or- 
ders of Great Britain prohibit us from trading with France. And 
what do we ? Why, in direct subserviency to the edicts of each, 
we prohibit our citizens from trading with either. We do more ; as 
if unqualified submission was not humiliating enough, we descend 
to an act of supererogation in servility ; we abandon trade altogether ; 
we not only refrain from that particular trade which their respective 
edicts proscribe, but lest the ingenuity of our merchants should ena- 
ble them to evade their operation, to make submission doubly sure, 
the American government virtually reenact the edicts of the belliger- 
ents, and abandon all the trade, which, notwithstanding the practi- 
cal effects of their edicts, remain to us. The same conclusion will 
result if we consider our embargo in relation to the objects of this 
belligerent policy. France, by her edicts, would oppress Great 
Britain, by destroying her commerce and cutting off her supplies. 
All the continent of Europe, in the hand of Bonaparte, is made sub- 
servient to this policy. The embargo law of the United States^ 
in its operation, is a union with this continental coalition against 
British commerce, at the very moment most auspicious to its suc- 
cess. Can any thing be more in direct subserviency to the views 
of the French emperor ? If we consider the orders of Great 
Britain, the result will be the same. I proceed, at present, on 
the supposition of a perfect impartiality in our administration to- 
wards both belligerents, so far as relates to the embargo law. 
Great Britain had two objects in view in issuing her orders — - 
First, to excite discontent in the people of the continent, by de- 
priving them of their accustomed colonial supplies. Second, to 
secure to herself that commerce of which she deprived neutrals. 
Our embargo cooperates with the British views in both respects. 
By our dereliction of the ocean, the continent is much more de- 
prived of the advantages of commerce, than it would be possible 
for the British navy to effect ; and by removing our competition, 
all the commerce of the continent which can be forced, is wholly 
left to be reaped by Great Britain. The language of each sove- 
reign is in direct conformity to these ideas. Napoleon tells the 
American minister virtually, that we are very good Americans ; 
that, although he will not allow the property he has in his hands 
to escape him, nor desist from burning and capturing our vessels 
on every occasion, yet that he is, thus far, satisfied with our co 



244 



MR. QUINCY'S SPEECH 



operation. And what is the language of George the Third, when 
our minister presents to his consideration the embargo laws? Is it 
Lit roy s'avisera 1 The king will reflect upon them. No, it is 
the pure language of royal approbation. Le roy le veut. The 
king wills it. Were you colonies, he could expect no more. His 
subjects as inevitably get that commerce which you abandon, as 
the water will certainly run into the only channel which remains 
after all the others are obstructed. In whatever point of view we 
consider these embargo laws in relation to those edicts and de- 
crees, we shall find them cooperating with each belligerent in its 
policy. In this way, I grant, our conduct may be impartial ; but 
what has become of our American right to navigate the ocean ? 
It is abandoned in strict conformity to the decrees of both bel- 
ligerents. This resolution declares, that we will no longer sub- 
mit to such degrading humiliation. Little as I relish, I will take 
it as the harbinger of a new day ; the pledge of a new system 
of measures. 

Perhaps, here, in strictness, I ought to close my observations. 
But the report of the committee, contrary to what I deem the 
principle of the resolution, unquestionably recommends the con- 
tinuance of the embargo laws. And such is the state of the na- 
tion, and in particular that portion of it, which in part I represent, 
under their oppression, that I cannot refrain from submitting some 
considerations on that subject. 

When I enter on the subject of the embargo, I am struck with 
winder at the very threshold. I know not with what words to 
express my astonishment. At the time I departed from Massa- 
chusetts, if there was an impression, which I thought universal, it 
was, that, at the commencement of this session, an end would be 
put to this measure. The opinion was not so much, that it would 
be terminated, as that it was then at an end. Sir, the prevailing 
sentiment, according to my apprehension, was stronger than this — 
even that the pressure was so great, that it could not possibly be 
endured ; that it would soon be absolutely insupportable. And 
this opinion, as I then had reason to believe, was not confined to 
any one class, or description, or party ; that even those who were 
friends of the existing administration, and unwilling to abandon it, 
were yet satisfied, that a sufficient trial had been given to this 
measure. With these impressions, I arrive in this city. I hear 
the incantations of the great enchanter. I feel his spell. I see 
the legislative machinery begin to move. The scene opens. 
And I am commanded to forget all my recollections, to disbelieve 
the eyidence of my senses, to contradict what I have seen, and 
heard, and felt. I hear, that all this discontent is mere party 
clamor — electioneering artifice ; that the people of New England 
are able and willing to endure this embargo for an indefinite, un- 



ON FOREIGN RELATIONS. 



245 



limited period ; some say for six months; some a year; some two 
years. The gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Macon) told 
us, that he preferred three years of embargo to a war. And the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Clopton) said expressly, that he 
hoped we should never allow our vessels to go upon the ocean 
again, until the orders and decrees of the belligerents were re- 
scinded ; in plain English, until France and Great Britain should, 
in their great condescension, permit. Good heavens ! Mr. Chair- 
man, are men mad ? Is this house touched with that insanity, 
which is the never- failing precursor of the intention of Heaven to 
destroy ? The people of New England, after eleven months' de- 
privation of the ocean, to be commanded still longer to abandon it, 
for an undefined period ; to hold their unalienable rights at the 
tenure of the will of Britain or of Bonaparte ! A people, com- 
mercial in all aspects, in all their relations, in all their hopes, in all 
their recollections of the past, in all their prospects of the future ; a 
people, whose first love was the ocean, the choice of their childhood, 
the approbation of their manly years, the most precious inheritance 
of their fathers, in the midst of their success, in the moment of the 
most exquisite perception of commercial prosperity, to be com- 
manded to abandon it, not for a time limited, but for a time un- 
limited ; not until they can be prepared to defend themselves there 
(for that is not pretended), but until their rivals recede from it ; 
not until their necessities require, but until foreign nations permit ! 
I am lost in astonishment, Mr. Chairman. I have not words to 
express the matchless absurdity of this attempt. I have no tongue 
to express the swift and headlong destruction, which a blind 
perseverance in such a system must bring upon this nation. 

But men from New England, representatives on this floor, 
equally with myself the constitutional guardians of her interests, 
differ from me in these opinions. My honorable colleague (Mr. 
Bacon) took occasion, in secret session, to deny that there did 
exist all that discontent and distress, which I had attempted, in an 
humble way, to describe. He told us he had travelled in Massa- 
chusetts, that the people were not thus dissatisfied, that the .em- 
bargo had not produced any such tragical effects. Really, sir, 
my honorable colleague has travelled — all the way from Stock- 
bridge to Hudson ; from Berkshire to Boston ; from inn to inn ; 
from county court to county court ; and doubtless he collected all 
that important information, which an acute intelligence never fails 
to retain on such occasions. He found tea, sugar, salt, West India 
rum and molasses dearer ; beef, pork, butter and cheese cheaper. 
Reflection enabled him to arrive at this difficult result, that in this 
way the evil and the good of the embargo equalize one another 
But has my honorable colleague travelled on the seaboard ? Has 
he witnessed the state of our cities ? Has he seen our ships rot- 



MR. QUINCY'S SPEECH 



ting at our wharves, our wharves deserted, our stores tenantless, 
our streets bereft of active business ; industry forsaking her be- 
loved haunts, and hope fled away from places where she had 
from earliest time been accustomed to make and to fulfil her most 
precious promises ? Has he conversed with the merchant, and 
heard the tale of his embarrassments — his capital arrested in his 
hands, forbidden by your laws to resort to a market, with property 
four times sufficient to discharge all his engagements, necessitated 
to hang on the precarious mercy of moneyed institutions for that 
indulgence, which preserves him from stopping payment, the first 
step towards bankruptcy ? Has he conversed with our mechan- 
ics ? That mechanic, who, the day before this embargo passed, 
the very day that you took this bit, and rolled it like a sweet 
morsel under your tongue, had more business than he had hands, 
or time or thought to employ in it, now soliciting, at reduced 
prices, that employment which the rich, owing to the uncertainty 
in which your laws have involved their capital, cannot afford ? I 
could heighten this picture. I could show you laboring poor in 
the almshouse, and willing industry dependent upon charity. 
But I confine myself to particulars, which have fallen under my 
own observation, and of which ten thousand suffering individuals 
on the seaboard of New England are living witnesses that here 
is nothing fictitious. 

Mr. Chairman, other gentlemen must take their responsibili- 
ties ; I shall take mine. This embargo must be repealed. You 
cannot enforce it for any important period of time longer. When 
I speak of your inability to enforce this law, let not gentlemen 
misunderstand me. I mean not to intimate insurrections or open 
defiances of them ; although it is impossible to foresee in what 
acts that " oppression" will finally terminate, which, we are told, 
"makes wise men mad." I speak of an inability resulting from 
very different causes. The gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. 
Macon) exclaimed the other day in a strain of patriotic ardor, 
" What ! shall not our laws be executed ? Shall their authority 
be defied ? I am for enforcing them at every hazard." I honor 
that gentleman's zeal ; and I mean no deviation from that true 
respect I entertain for him, when I tell him, that, in this instance, 
" his zeal is not according to knowledge." 

I ask this house, Is there no control to its authority ? is there no 
limit to the power of this national legislature? I hope I shall of- 
fend no man, when I intimate that two limits exist ; — nature and 
the constitution. Should this house undertake to declare, that 
this atmosphere should no longer surround us, that water should 
cease to flow, that gravity should not hereafter operate, that the 
needle should not vibrate to the pole, I do suppose, Mr. Chair- 
man — s i rj I mean no disrespect to the authority of this house; I 



ON FOREIGN RELATIONS. 



247 



know the high notions some gentlemen entertain on this subject ; 
— I do suppose — sir, I hope I shall not offend ; — I think I may 
venture to affirm, that, such a law to the contrary notwithstanding, 
the air would continue to circulate, the Mississippi, the Hudson 
and the Potomac would roll their floods to the ocean, heavy 
bodies continue to descend, and the mysterious magnet hold on 
its course to its celestial cynosure. 

Just as utterly absurd and contrary to nature is it, to attempt to 
prohibit the people of New England, for any considerable length 
of time, from the ocean. Commerce is not only associated with 
all the feelings, the habits, the interests and relations of that 
people, but the nature of our soil, and of our coasts, the state of 
our population and its mode of distribution over our territory, ren- 
ders it indispensable. We have five hundred miles of sea-coast ; 
all furnished with harbors, bays, creeks, rivers, inlets, basins, with 
every variety of invitation to the sea, with every species of facility 
to violate such laws as these. Our people are not scattered over 
an immense surface, at a solemn distance from each other, in 
lordly retirement, in the midst of extended plantations and inter- 
vening wastes : they are collected on the margin of the ocean, by 
the sides of rivers, at the heads of bays, looking into the water or 
on the surface of it for the incitement and the reward of their in- 
dustry. Among a people thus situated, thus educated, thus nu- 
merous, laws, prohibiting them from the exercise of their natural 
rights, will have a binding effect not one moment longer than the 
public sentiment supports them. Gentlemen talk of twelve reve- 
nue cutters additional to enforce the embargo laws. Multiply the 
number by twelve, multiply it by a hundred, join all your ships 
of war, all your gun-boats, and all your militia, in despite of them 
all, such laws as these are of no avail when they become odious 
to public sentiment. Continue these laws any considerable time 
longer, and it is very doubtful, if you will have officers to exe- 
cute, juries to convict, or purchasers to bid for your confiscations. 
Cases have begun to occur. Ask your revenue officers, and they 
will tell you that already at public sales in your cities, under these 
laws, the owner has bought his property at less than four per cent. 
upon the real value. Public opinion begins to look, with such a 
jealous and hateful eye, upon these laws, that even self-interest 
will not cooperate to enforce their penalties. 

But where is our love of order — where our respect for the 
laws ? Let legislators beware, lest by the very nature of their 
laws, they weaken that sentiment of respect for them, so impor- 
tant to be inspired, and so difficult to be reinstated when it has 
once been driven from the mind. Regulate not the multitude to 
their ruin. Disgust not men of virtue by the tendency of your 
laws, lest, when they cannot yield them the sanction of their ap 



248 



MR. QUINCY'S SPEECH 



probation, the enterprising and the necessitous find a principal 
check upon their fears of violating them removed. It is not 
enough for men in place to exclaim, " The worthless part of so- 
ciety." Words cannot alter the nature of things. You cannot 
identify the violator of such laws as these, in our part of the 
country, for any great length of time, with the common smuggler, 
nor bring the former down to the level of the latter. The reason 
is obvious. You bring the duties the citizen owes to society, 
into competition, not only with the strongest interests, but, which 
is more, with the most sacred private obligations. When you 
present to the choice of a citizen, bankruptcy, a total loss of the 
accumulated wealth of his whole life, or a violation of a positive 
law, restrictive of the exercise of the most common rights, it pre- 
sents to him a most critical alternative. I will not say how sublime 
casuists may decide. But it is easy to foretell that nature will 
plead too strong in the bosom to make obedience long possible. 
I state no imaginary case. Thousands in New England see, in 
the continuance of this embargo and in obedience to it, irremedia- 
ble ruin to themselves and families. But where is our patriotism? 
Sir, you call upon patriotism for sacrifices, to which it is unequal, 
and require its operation in a way, in which that passion cannot 
long subsist. Patriotism is a great comfort to men in the interior ; 
to the farmer and the planter, who are denied a market by your 
laws, whose local situation is such, that they can neither sell their 
produce, nor scarcely give it away, and who are made to believe 
that their privations will ultimately redound to the benefit of the 
country. But on the sea-board, where men feel, not only their 
annual profit, but their whole capital perishing, where they know 
the utter inefricacy of your laws to coerce foreign nations, and 
their utter futility as a mean of saving our own property ; to such 
laws, in such a situation, patriotism is, to say the least, a very in- 
active assistant. You cannot lay a man upon the rack, and 
crack his muscles by a slow torment, and call patriotism to soothe 
the sufferer. 

But there is another obstacle to a long and effectual continu- 
ance of this law — the doubt, which hangs over its constitutional- 
ity. I know I shall be told, that the sanction of the judiciary has 
been added to this act of the legislature. Sir, I honor that tribu- 
nal. I revere the individual whose opinion declared, in this in- 
stance, the constitutionality of the law. But it is one thing to 
venerate our courts of justice ; it is one thing to deem this law 
obligatory upon the citizen, while it has all these sanctions ; it is 
another, on this floor, in the high court of the people's privileges, 
to advocate its repeal on the ground that it is an invasion of theii 
rights. The embargo laws have unquestionable sanction. Thev 
are laws of this land. Yet, who shall deny to a representative of 



ON FOREIGN RELATIONS. 



249 



this people the right, in their own favorite tribunal, of bringing 
your laws to the test of the principles of the constitution ? 

Is there any principle more wise, or more generally received 
among statesmen, than that a law, in proportion to its pressure 
ipon the people, should have its basis in unquestionable authority, 
as well as necessity ? A legislature may sport with the rights ot 
an individual. It may violate the constitution to the ruin oi 
whole classes of men. But once let it begin, by its laws, to 
crush the hopes of the great mass of the citizens ; let it bring ev- 
ery eye, in the land, to the scrutiny of its laws, and its authori- 
ty — to be permanent, those laws must possess no flaw in their 
foundation. 

I ask, in what page of the constitution you find the power of 
laying an embargo. Directly given, it is no where. You have 
it, then, by construction, or by precedent — by construction of 
the power to regulate. I lay out of the question the common- 
place argument, that regulation cannot mean annihilation ; and 
that what is annihilated, cannot be regulated. I ask this question, 
Can a power be ever obtained by construction, which had never 
been exercised at the time of the authority given ; the like of 
which had not only never been seen, but the idea of which had 
never entered into human imagination, I will not say, in this coun- 
try, but in the world ? Yet such is this power, which by con- 
struction you assume to exercise. Never before did society wit- 
ness a total prohibition of all intercourse like this in a commercial 
nation. Did the people of the United States invest this house 
with a power, of which, at the time of investment, that people 
had not and could not have had any idea ? — for even in works of fic- 
tion, it had never existed. But we have precedent. Precedent is 
directly against you. For the only precedent, that in 1794, was 
in conformity to the embargo power, as it had been exercised in 
other countries. It was limited. Its duration was known. The 
power passed from the representatives of this house only for sixty 
days. In that day, the legislature would not trust even Washing- 
ton, amid all his well-earned influence, with any other than a limit- 
ed power. But away, sir, with such deductions as these. I appeal 
to the history of the times, when this national compact was formed. 
This constitution grew out of our necessities, and it was, in every 
stage of its formation, obstructed by the jealousies and diverse in- 
terests of the different states*. The gentlemen of the south had 
certain species of property, with the control of which they would 
not trust us in the north ; and wisely, for we neither appreciate it 
as they do, nor could regulate it safely for them. In the east, our 
sentiment concerning their interest in commerce, and their power 
to understand its true interests, was, in a great degree, similar. 
The writings of that period exhibit this jealousy, and the fears, 



1250 



MR. QUINCY'S SPEECH 



excited by it, formed in that portion of the United States a for- 
midable objection to its adoption. In this state of things, would 
the people of New England consent to convey to a legislature, 
constituted as this in time must be, a power, not only to regulate 
commerce, but to annihilate it for a time unlimited, or altogether ? 
Suppose, in 1788, in the convention of Massachusetts, while de- 
bating upon the adoption of this constitution, some hoary sage had 
arisen, and with an eye looking deep into futurity, with a prophet's 
ken, had thus addressed the assembly : — " Fellow-citizens of Mas- 
sachusetts, to what ruin are you hastening ! Twenty years shall 
not elapse, before, under a secret and dubious construction of the 
instrument now proposed for your adoption, your commerce shall 
be annihilated ; the whole of your vast trade prohibited. Not a 
boat shall cross your harbor, not a coaster shall be permitted to go 
out of your ports, unless under permission of the distant head of 
your nation, and after a grievous visitation of a custom-house offi- 
cer." Sir, does any man believe, that, with such a prospect into 
futurity, the people of that state would have for one moment lis- 
tened to its adoption ? Rather would they not have rejected it 
with indignation ? Yet this, now, is not prophecy. It is history. 
But this law is not perpetual, it is said. Show the limit to it. 
Show by what terms it can be made more perpetual. 

The universal opinion entertained in New England among com- 
mercial men of the total imbecility of this law, as a measure of 
coercion of either belligerent, is another cause, pregnant with dis- 
content in that country. It may do well enough to amuse our- 
selves with calculations of this kind on this floor ; but intelligent 
merchants, masters of vessels, seamen, who are acquainted with the 
West Indies, and with the European dominions of both powers, 
speak with sovereign contempt of the idea of starving either of 
these powers into submission to our plans of policy. The entire 
failure of this scheme, after a trial of eleven months, would, I 
should suppose, have satisfied the most obstinate of its hopeless- 
ness. Yet it is revived again at this session. We are told, from 
high authority, of the failure of the wheat harvest in Great Britain, 
and this has been urged as a further reason for a continuance of 
this measure. Have gentlemen, who press this argument, informed 
themselves how exceedingly small a proportion our export of 
wheat bears to the whole consumption of the British dominions ? 
Our whole export to all the world, of'wheat in its natural and man- 
ufactured state, does not amount to seven millions of bushels. 
The whole consumption of the British dominions exceeds one hun- 
dred and fifty millions. Let gentlemen consider what a small ob- 
ject this amount is, in a national point of view, even could the at- 
tainment of the whole supply be assumed, as the condition of her 
y ; elding to the terms we should prescribe. Are not the borders 



ON FOREIGN RELATIONS. 



251 



of the Black sea, the coast of Africa and South America, all wheat 
countries, open to her commerce ? 

But the embargo saves our resources. It may justly be ques- 
tioned, whether, in this point of view, the embargo is so effectual 
as, at first, men are led to imagine. It may be doubted if the 
seed-wheat for this harvest is not worth more than the whole crop. 
I say nothing of the embarrassments of our commerce, of the loss 
of our seamen, of the sunken value of real estate. But our dead, 
irredeemable loss by this embargo, during the present year, cannot 
be stated at less than ten per centum, on account of interest and 
profit on the whole export of our country — that is, on the one hun- 
dred and eight millions, ten million eight hundred thousand dollars. 

Nor can our loss upon a million tons of unemployed shipping 
be stated at less than at twenty dollars the ton — twenty millions 
of dollars. Thirty millions of dollars is a serious outfit for any 
voyage of salvation ; and the profit ought to be very unquestion- 
able, before a wise man would be persuaded to renew or prolong 
it. Besides, is it true that the articles the embargo retains are, in 
the common acceptation of the term, resources ? I suppose, that 
by this word, so ostentatiously used on all occasions, it is meant to 
convey the idea, that the produce thus retained in the country, 
will be a resource for use, or defence, in case of war, or any other 
misfortune happening to it. But is this true ? Our exports are 
surplus products — what we raise beyond what we consume. Be- 
cause we cannot use them, they are surplus. Of course, in this 
country they have little or no value in use, but only in exchange. 
Take away the power of exchange, and how can they be called 
resources? Every year produces sufficient for its own consump- 
tion, and a surplus. Suppose an embargo of ten years: will gen- 
tlemen seriously contend, that the accumulating surplus of fish, 
cotton, tobacco and flour would be a resource for any national ex- 
igencies ? We cannot consume it, because the annual product is 
equal to our annual consumption. Our embargo forbids us to sell 
it. How, then, is it a resource ? Are we stronger or richer for 
it ? The reverse — we are weaker and poorer. Weaker by all the 
loss of motive to activity, by all the diminution of the industry of 
the country, which such a deprivation of the power to exchange, 
produces. And what can be poorer than he, who is obliged to 
keep what he cannot use, and to labor for that which profit- 
eth not ? 

It is in vain to say, that if the embargo was raised there would 
be no market. The merchants understand that subject better than 
you ; and the eagerness with which preparations to load were car- 
ried on previous to the commencement of this session, speaks, in 
a language not to be mistaken, their opinion of the foreign mar' 
kets. But it has been asked in debate, " Will not Massachusetts, 



252 



MR. QUINCY'S SPEECH 



the cradle of liberty, submit to such privations?" An embargo 
liberty was never cradled in Massachusetts. Our liberty was not 
so much a mountain, as a sea-nymph. She was free as air. She 
could swim, or she could run. The ocean was her cradle. Our 
fathers met her as she came, like the goddess of beauty, from the 
waves. They caught her as she was sporting on the beach. 
They courted her whilst she was spreading her nets upon the 
rocks. But an embargo liberty ; a hand-cuffed liberty ; a liberty 
in fetters ; a liberty traversing between the four sides of a prison 
and beating her head against the walls, is none of our offspring. 
We abjure the monster. Its parentage is all inland. 

The gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Macon) exclaimed 
the other day, " Where is the spirit of '76?" Ay, sir, where is 
it? Would to Heaven, that at our invocation, it would conde- 
scend to alight on this floor. But let gentlemen remember, that 
the spirit of '76 was not a spirit of empty declaration, or of abstract 
propositions. It did not content itself with non-importation acts, 
or non-intercourse laws. It was a spirit of active preparation ; of 
dignified energy. It studied both to know our rights and to de- 
vise the effectual means of maintaining them. In all the annals of 
'76, you will rind no such degrading doctrine, as that maintained 
in this report. It never presented to the people of the United 
States the alternative of war or a suspension of our rights, and rec- 
ommended the latter rather than to incur the risk of the former. 
What was the language of that period, in one of the addresses of 
congress to Great Britain? " You attempt to reduce us by the 
sword to base and abject submission. On the sword, therefore, 
we rely for protection." In that day there were no alternatives 
presented to dishearten ; no abandonment of our rights, under the 
pretence of maintaining them; no gaining the battle by running 
away. In the whole history of that period there are no such 
terms as " embargo ; dignified retirement ; trying who can do each 
other the most harm." At that time we had a navy ; that name 
so odious to the influences of the present day. Yes, sir, in 1776, 
though but in our infancy, w T e had a navy scouring our coasts, and 
defending our commerce, which was never for one moment wholly 
suspended. In 1776, we had an army also;, and a glorious army 
it was ! Not composed of men halting from the stews, or swept 
from the jails ; but of the best blood, the real yeomanry of the 
country — noble cavaliers, men without fear and without reproach. 
We had such an army in 1776, and Washington at its head. We 
iiave an army in 1808, and a head to it. 

I will not humiliate those who lead the fortunes of the nation at 
the present day, by any comparison with the great men of that 
period. But I recommend the advocates of the present system of 
public measures to study well the true spirit of 1776, before they 



ON FOREIGN RELATIONS. 



* 253 



venture to call it in aid of their purposes. It may bring in its train 
some recollections not suited to give ease or hope to their bosoms. 
I beg gentlemen who are so frequent in their recurrence to that 
period, to remember, that among the causes which led to a sepa- 
ration from Great Britain, the following are enumerated : " Un- 
necessary restrictions upon trade ; cutting off commercial inter- 
course between the colonies ; embarrassing our fisheries ; wanton- 
ly depriving our citizens of necessaries ; invasion of private prop- 
erty by governmental edicts ; the authority of the commander-in- 
chief, and under him of the brigadier-general, being rendered su- 
preme in the civil government; the commander-in-chief of the 
army made governor of a colony ; citizens transferred from their 
native country for trial." Let gentlemen beware how they appeal 
to the spirit of '76 ; lest it come with the aspect, not of a friend, 
but of a tormentor ; lest they find a warning, when they look for 
support, and instead of encouragement they are presented with an 
awful lesson. 

But repealing the embargo will be submission to tribute. The 
popular ear is fretted with this word tribute ; and an odium is at- 
tempted to be thrown upon those, who are indignant at this aban- 
donment of their rights, by representing them as the advocates of 
tribute. Sir, who advocates it? No man in this country, I be- 
lieve. This outcry about tribute is the veriest bugbear that w r as 
ever raised, in order to persuade men to quit rights which Gocl and 
nature had given them. In the first place, it is scarce possible, 
that, if left to himself, the interest of the merchant could ever per- 
mit him to pay the British re-exportation duty, denominated tribute. 
France, under penalty of confiscation, prohibits our vessels from 
receiving a visit from an English ship, or touching at an English 
port. In this state of things, England pretends to permit us to 
export to France certain articles, paying her a duty. The state- 
ment of the case shows the futility of the attempt. Who will pay 
a duty to England for permission to go to France to be confis- 
cated ? But suppose there is a mistake in this, and that it may 
be the interest of the merchant to pay such duty, for the purpose 
of going to certain destruction, have not you full powers over this 
matter? Cannot you, by pains and penalties, prohibit the mer- 
chant from the payment of such a duty ? No man will obstruct 
you. There is, as I believe, but one opinion upon this subject. 
I hope, therefore, that gentlemen will cease this outcry about 
tribute. 

However, suppose that the payment of this duty is inevitable, 
which it certainly is not, let me ask — Is embargo independence ? 
Deceive not yourselves. It is palpable submission. Gentlemen 
exclaim, Great Britain " smites us on one cheek." And what 
does administration ? " It turns the other also." Gentlemen say 
22 



254 | MR. QUINCY'S SPEECH, &c. 



Great Britain is a robber ; she takes our cloak." And what say 
administration ? " Let her take our coat also." France and 
Great Britain require you to relinquish a part of your commerce, 
and you yield it entirely. Sir, this conduct may be the way to 
dignity and honor in another world, but it will never secure safety 
and independence in this. 

At every corner of this great city we meet some gentlemen of 
the majority wringing their hands and exclaiming — " What shall 
we do? Nothing but embargo will save us. Remove it, and 
what shall we do? " Sir. it is not for me, an humble and uninflu- 
ential individual, at an awful distance from the predominant influ- 
ences, to suggest plans of government. But to my eye, the path 
of our duty is as distinct as the milky way ; all studded with living 
sapphires ; glowing with cumulating light. It is the path of active 
preparation ; of dignified energy. It is the path of 1776. It con- 
sists not in abandoning our rights, but in supporting them, as they 
exist, and where they exist — on the ocean, as well as on the land. 
It consists in taking the nature of things, as the measure of the 
rights of your citizens ; not the orders and decrees of imperious 
foreigners. Give what protection you can. Take no counsel of 
fear. Your strength will increase with the trial, and prove greater 
than you are now aware. 

But I shall be told, " This may lead to war." I ask, " Are we 
now at peace?" Certainly not, unless retiring from insult be 
peace ; unless shrinking under the lash be peace. The surest 
way to prevent war is not to fear it. The idea, that nothing on 
earth is so dreadful as war, is inculcated too studiously among us. 
Disgrace is worse. Abandonment of essential rights is worse. 

Sir, I could not refrain from seizing the first opportunity of 
spreading before this house the sufferings and exigencies of New 
England, under this embargo. Some gentlemen may deem it not 
strictly before us. In my opinion, it is necessarily. For, if the 
idea of the committee be correct, and embargo is resistance, then 
this resolution sanctions its continuance. If, on the contrary, as I 
contend, embargo is submission, then this resolution is a pledge 
of its repeal. 



SPEECH OF JOHN RANDOLPH, 



DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE 
UNITED STATES, DECEMBER 10, 1811, 

On the second resolution reported by the committee of foreign relations, 
" That an additional force of ten thousand regular troops ought to be im- 
mediately raised, to serve for three years ; and that a bounty in lands 
ought to be given to encourage enlistment." 



Mr. Speaker, 

This is a question, as it has been presented to this house, of 
peace or war. In that light it has been argued ; in no other light 
can I consider it, after the declarations made by members of the 
committee of foreign relations. Without intending any disrespect 
to the chair, I must be permitted to say, that if the decision yes- 
terday was correct, "that it was not in order to advance any ar- 
guments against the resolution, drawn from topics before other 
committees of the house," the whole debate, nay, the report it- 
self, on which we are acting, is disorderly, since the increase of 
the military force is a subject, at this time, in agitation by a select 
committee, raised on that branch of the president's message. But 
it is impossible that the discussion of a question, broad as the wide 
ocean of our foreign concerns, involving every consideration of in- 
terest, of right, of happiness, and of safety at home ; touching, in 
every 7 point, all that is dear to freemen, " their lives, their fortunes, 
and their sacred honor," can be tied down by the narrow rules of 
technical routine. 

The committee of foreign relations have, indeed, decided that 
the subject of arming the militia (which has been pressed upon 
them as indispensable to the public security), does not come with- 
in the scope of their authority. On what ground, I have been and 
still am unable to see, they have felt themselves authorized to 
recommend the raising of standing armies, with a view (as has 
been declared) of immediate war — a war, not of defence, but of 
conquest, of aggrandizement, of ambition — a war foreign to the 
interests of this country — to the interests of humanity itself. 

I know not how gentlemen, calling themselves republicans, can 
advocate such a war. What was their doctrine in 1798 and '9, when 
the command of the army — that highest of all possible trusts in 



256 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH ON 



any government, be the form what it may — was reposed in the 
bosom of the father of his country — the sanctuary of a nation's 
love ; the only hope that never came in vain ! — when other wor- 
thies of the revolution, Hamilton, Pinkney, and the younger Wash- 
ington, men of tried patriotism, of approved conduct and valor, of 
untarnished honor, held subordinate command under him. Re- 
publicans were then unwilling to trust a standing army even to 
his hands, who had given proof that he was above all human 
temptation. Where now is the revolutionary hero, to whom you 
are about to confide this sacred trust ? To whom will you confide 
the charge of leading the flower of our youth to the heights of 
Abraham ? Will you find him in the person of an acquitted felon ? 
What ! then you were unwilling to vote an army where such men 
as have been named held hieh command ! When Washington 
himself was at the head, did you show such reluctance, feel such 
scruples ; and are you now nothing loath, fearless of every conse- 
quence ? Will you say that your provocations were less then 
than now, when your direct commerce was interdicted, your am- 
bassadors hooted with derision from the French court, tribute de- 
manded, actual war waged upon you? 

Those who opposed the army then, were, indeed, denounced 
as the partisans of France ; as the same men (some of them at 
least) are now held up as the advocates of England ; those firm 
and undeviating republicans, who then dared, and now dare, to 
cling to the ark of the constitution, to defend it even at the ex- 
pense of their fame, rather than surrender themselves to the wild 
projects of mad ambition. There is a fatality attending plenitude 
of power. Soon or late, some mania seizes upon its possessors ; 
they fall from the dizzy height through giddiness. Like a vast 
estate, heaped up by the labor and industry of one man, which 
seldom survives the third generation ; power gained by patient 
assiduity, by a faithful and regular discharge of its attendant du- 
ties, soon gets above its own origin- Intoxicated with their own 
greatness, the federal party fell. Will not the same causes pro- 
duce the same effects now as then ? Sir, you may raise this army, 
you may build up this vast structure of patronage ; but " lay not 
the flattering unction to your souls ; " you will never live to en- 
joy the succession. You sign your political death-warrant. 

[After adverting to the provocation to hostilities from shutting 
up the Mississippi, by Spain, in 1803, Mr. Randolph proceeded 
us follows :] 

The peculiar situation of the frontier, at that time insulted, 
alone induced the committee to recommend the raising of regular 
troops. It was too remote from the population of the country for 
the militia to act, in repelling and chastising Spanish incursion 
New Orleans and its dependencies were separated by a vast ex 



AN INCREASE OF THE ARMY. 



257 



tent of wilderness from the settlements of the old United States ; 
filled with a disloyal and turbulent people, alien to our institutions, 
language and manners, and disaffected towards our government. 
Little reliance could be placed upon them ; and it was plain, that 
if " it was the intention of Spain to advance on our possessions 
until she be repulsed by an opposing force," that force must be a 
regular army, unless we were disposed to abandon all the country 
south of Tennessee ; that " the protection of our citizens and the 
spirit and the honor of our country required that force should be 
interposed." Nothing remained but for the legislature to grant 
the only practicable means, or to shrink from the most sacred of 
all its duties — to abandon the soil and its inhabitants to the mercy 
of hostile invaders. Yet this report, moderate as it was, was 
deemed of too strong a character by the house. It was rejected : 
and, at the motion of a gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Bid- 
well) [who has since taken a great fancy also to Canada, and 
marched off thither, in advance of the committee of foreign rela- 
tions], " two millions of dollars were appropriated towards" (not 
in full of) " any extraordinary expense which might be incurred 
in the intercourse between the United States and foreign nations ; " 
in other words, to buy off, at Paris, Spanish aggressions at home. 
Was this fact given in evidence of our impartiality towards the 
belligerents? That to the insults and injuries and actual invasion 
of one of them, we opposed, not bullets, but dollars ; that to Span- 
ish invasion we opposed money, whilst for British aggression on 
the high seas we had arms — offensive war ? But Spain was then 
shielded, as well as instigated, by a greater power. Hence our 
respect for her. Had we at that time acted as we ought to 
have done in defence of our rights — of the natale solum itself, we 
should, I feel confident, have avoided that series of insult, dis- 
grace and injury, which has been poured out upon us in long, un- 
broken succession. We would not, then, raise a small, regular force 
for a country, where the militia could not act, to defend our own 
territory ; now we are willing to levy a great army — for great it 
must be to accomplish the proposed object — for a war of conquest 
and ambition ; and this, too, at the very entrance of the "northern 
hive" of the strongest part of the union. 

An insinuation has fallen from the gentleman from Tennessee 
(Mr. Grundy), that the late massacre of our brethren on the 
Wabash was instigated by the British government. Has the 
president given any such information ? Is it so believed by the 
administration ? I have cause to believe the contrary to be the 
fact — that such is not their opinion. This insinuation is of the 
grossest kind — a presumption the most rash, the most unjustifiable. 
Show but good ground for it, I will give up the question at the 
threshold ; I will be ready to march to Canada. It is, indeed, 
22 * K K 



258 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH ON 



well calculated to excite the feelings of the western people partic- 
ularly, who are not quite so tenderly attached to our red brethren 
as some of our modern philosophers ; but it is destitute of any 
foundation beyond mere surmise and suspicion. What would be 
thought, if, without any proof whatsoever, a member should rise 
in his place and tell us that the massacre in Savannah — a massa- 
cre perpetrated by civilized savages, with French commissions in 
their pockets, was excited by the French government? There is 
an easy and natural solution of the late transaction on the Wabash, 
in the well-known character of the aboriginal savage of North 
America, without resorting to any such mere conjectural estimate. 
I am sorry to say, that, for this signal calamity and disgrace, the 
house is, in part, at least, answerable. Session after session our 
table has been piled up with Indian treaties, for which the appro- 
priations have been voted as a matter of course, without examina- 
tion. Advantage has been taken of the spirit of the Indians, 
broken by the war which ended in the treaty of Grenville. Un- 
der the ascendency then acquired over them, they have been pent 
up, by subsequent treaties, into nooks ; straitened in their quarters 
by a blind cupidity, seeking to extinguish their title to immense 
wildernesses ; for which (possessing, as we do already, more land 
than we can sell or use) we shall not have occasion, for half a 
century to come. It is our own thirst for territory, our own want 
of moderation, that has driven these sons of nature to desperation, 
of which w r e feel the effects. Although not personally acquainted 
with the late Col. Daveiss, I feel, I am persuaded, as deep and 
serious regret for his loss as the gentleman from Tennessee him- 
self. I know him only through the representation of a friend of 
the deceased (Mr. Rowan), some time a member of this house — 
a man who, for native force of intellect, manliness of character, and 
high sense of honor, is not inferior to any that have ever sat here. 
With him I sympathize in the severest calamity that could befall a 
man of his cast of character. Would to God they were both 
now on this floor. From my personal knowledge of the one, I 
feel confident that I should have his support ; and, 1 believe (judg- 
ing of him from the representation of our common friend), of the 
other also. 

I cannot refrain from smiling at the liberality of the gentleman, 
in giving Canada to New York, in order to strengthen the 
northern balance of power; while, at the same time, he fore- 
warns her, that the western scale must preponderate. I can al- 
most fancy that I see the capitol in motion towards the falls of 
Ohio; after a short sojourn, taking its flight to the Mississippi, and 
finally alighting on Darien ; which, w 7 hen the gentleman's dreams 
are realized, will be a most eligible seat of government for the new 
republic (or empire) of the two Ameriras ! But it seems, that 



AN INCREASE OF THE ARMY. 



259 



"in 1808 we talked and acted foolishly," and to give some color 
of consistency to that folly, we must now commit a greater. Re- 
ally I cannot conceive of a weaker reason, offered in support of 
a present measure, than the justification of a former folly. I hope 
we shall act a wise part; take warning by our follies, since we 
have become sensible of them, and resolve to talk and act foolishly 
no more. It is, indeed, high time to give over such preposterous 
language and proceedings. This war of conquest — a war for the 
acquisition of territory and subjects — is to be a new commentary 
on the doctrine, that republicans are destitute of ambition ; that 
they are addicted to peace, wedded to the happiness and safety of 
the great body of their people. But, it seems, this is to be a holi- 
day campaign ; there is to be no expense of blood or treasure on 
our part ; Canada is to conquer herself ; she is to be subdued by 
the principles of fraternity ! The people of that country are first 
to be seduced from their allegiance, and converted into traitors, as 
preparatory to making them good citizens! Although I must 
acknowledge, that some of our flaming patriots were thus manu- 
factured, I do not think the process would hold good with a 
whole community. It is a dangerous experiment. We are to 
succeed in the French mode, by the system of fraternization — all 
is French ! But how dreadfully it might be retorted on the south- 
ern and western slave-holding states. I detest this subornation 
of treason. No ; if we must have them, let them fall by the valor 
of our arms ; by fair, legitimate conquest ; not become the victims 
of treacherous seduction. 

I am not surprised at the war-spirit which is manifesting itself 
in gentlemen from the south. In the year 1805 — 6, in a strug- 
gle for the carrying trade of belligerent-colonial produce, this 
country was most unwisely brought into collision with the great 
powers of Europe. By a series of most impolitic and ruinous 
measures, utterly incomprehensible to every rational, sober-mind- 
ed man, the southern planters, by their own votes, have succeed- 
ed in knocking down the price of cotton to seven cents, and of to- 
bacco (a few choice crops excepted) to nothing ; and in raising 
the price of blankets (of which a few would not be amiss in a 
Canadian campaign), coarse woollens, and every article of first 
necessity, three or four hundred per centum. And now, that, by 
our own acts, we have brought ourselves into this unprecedented 
condition, we must get out of it in any way, but by an acknowl- 
edgment of our own want of wisdom and forecast. But is war 
the true remedy ? Who will profit by it ? Speculators ; a few 
lucky merchants, who draw prizes in the lottery ; commissaries 
and contracters. Who must suffer by it ? The people. It is 
their blood, their taxes, that must flow to support it. 

But gentlemen avowed that they would not go to war for the 



260 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH ON 



carrying trade ; that is, for any other but the direct export and 
import trade ; that which carries our native products abroad, and 
brings back the return cargo ; and yet they stickle for our com- 
mercial rights, and will go to war for them ! I wish to know, in 
point of principle, what difference gentlemen can point out be- 
tween the abandonment of this or of that maritime right ? Do 
gentlemen assume the lofty port and tone of chivalrous redressers 
of maritime wrongs, and declare their readiness to surrender every 
other maritime right, provided they may remain unmolested in the 
exercise of the humble privilege of carrying their own produce 
abroad, and bringing back a return cargo ? Do you make this dec- 
laration to the enemy at the outset ? Do you state the minimum 
with which you will be contented, and put it in their power to 
close with your proposals at their option ; give her the basis of a 
treaty ruinous and disgraceful beyond example and expression ? 
And this too, after having turned up your noses in disdain at the 
treaties of Mr. Jay and Mr. Monroe ! Will you say to England, 
"End the war when you please; give us the direct trade in our 
own produce, we are content ? " But what will the merchants of 
Salem, and Boston, and New York, and Philadelphia, and Balti- 
more, the men of Marblehead and cape Cod, say to this ? Will 
they join in a war, professing to have for its object what they 
would consider (and jusily too) as the sacrifice of their maritime 
rights, yet affecting to be a war for the protection of commerce ? 

I am gratified to find gentlemen acknowledging the demoral- 
izing and destructive consequences of the non-importation law ; 
confessing the truth of all that its opponents foretold, when it was 
enacted. And will you plunge yourselves in war, because you 
have passed a foolish and ruinous law, and are ashamed to repeal 
it ? " But our good friend, the French emperor, stands in the 
way of its repeal ; and as we cannot go too far in making sacrifices to 
him, who has given such demonstration of his love for the Ameri- 
cans, we must, in point of fact, become parties to his war. Who 
can be so cruel as to refuse him that favor ? " My imagination 
shrinks from the miseries of such a connection. I call upon the 
house to reflect, whether they are not about to abandon all recla- 
mation for the unparalleled outrages, "insults and injuries" of the 
French government ; to give up our claim for plundered millions ; 
and I ask what reparation or atonement they can expect to obtain 
in hours of future dalliance, after they shall have made a tender 
of their person to this great deflowerer of the virginity of repub- 
lics ? We have, by our own wise (I will not say wiseacre) meas- 
ures, so increased the trade and wealth of Montreal and Quebec, 
that at last we begin to cast a wishful eye at Canada. Having 
done so much towards its improvement, by the exercise of " our 
restrictive energies," we begin to think the laborer worthy of his 



AN INCREASE OF THE ARMY. 



261 



hire, and to put in claim for our portion. Suppose it ours, are we 
any nearer to our point ? As his minister said to the king of 
Epirus, " May we not as well take our bottle of wine before as 
after this exploit?" Go! march to Canada! leave the broad 
bosom of the Chesapeake and her hundred tributary rivers, the 
whole line of sea-coast from Machias to St. Mary's, unprotected ! 
You have taken Quebec — have you conquered England ? Will 
you seek for the deep foundations of her power in the frozen 
deserts of Labrador ? 

" Her march is on the mountain wave, 
Her home is on the deep." 

Will you call upon her to leave your ports and harbors un- 
touched, only just till you can return from Canada, to defend 
them? The coast is to be left defenceless, whilst men of the inte- 
rior are revelling in conquest and spoil. But grant for a moment, 
for mere argument's sake, that in Canada you touched the sinews 
of her strength, instead of removing a clog upon her resources — 
an encumbrance, but one which, from a spirit of honor, she will 
vigorously defend. In what situation would you then place some 
of the best men of the nation ? As Chatham and Burke, and the 
whole band of her patriots, prayed for her defeat in 1776, so must 
some of the truest friends to their country deprecate the success 
of our arms against the only power that holds in check the arch- 
enemy of mankind. 

The committee have outstripped the executive. In designating 
the power, against whom this force is to be employed, as has most 
unadvisedly been done in the preamble or manifesto with which the 
resolutions are prefaced, they have not consulted the views of the 
executive, that designation is equivalent to an abandonment of all 
our claims on the French government. No sooner was the report 
laid on the table, than the vultures were flocking round their 
prey — the carcass of a great military establishment. Men of 
tainted reputation, of broken fortune (if they ever had any), and 
of battered constitutions, " choice spirits, tired of the dull pursuits 
of civil life," were seeking after agencies and commissions, willing 
to doze in gross stupidity over the public fire ; to light the public 
candle at both ends. Honorable men undoubtedly there are, 
ready to serve their country ; but what man of spirit, or of self- 
respect, will accept a commission in the present army ? The gen- 
tleman from Tennessee (Mr. Grundy) addressed himself yester- 
day exclusively to the " republicans of the house." I know not 
whether I may consider myself as entitled to any part of the ben- 
efit of the honorable gentleman's discourse. It belongs not, how 
ever, to that gentleman to decide. If we must have an exposi 
tion of the doctrines of republicanism, I shall receive it from the 



262 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH ON 



fathers of the church, and not from the junior apprentices of the 
law. I shall appeal to my worthy friends from Carolina (Messrs. 
Macon and Stanford), " men with whom I have measured my 
strength," by whose side I have fought during the reign of ter- 
ror ; for it was indeed an hour of corruption, of oppression, of 
pollution. It is not at all to my taste — that sort of republican- 
ism which was supported, on this side of the Atlantic, by the 
father of the sedition law, John Adams, and by Peter Porcupine 
on the other. Republicanism ! of John Adams and William Cob- 
bett J********** 
Gallant crusaders in the holy cause of republicanism ! Such "re- 
publicanism does, indeed, mean any thing or nothing." Our 
people will not submit to be taxed for this war of conquest and 
dominion. The government of the United States was not calcu- 
lated to wage offensive foreign war ; it was instituted for the com- 
mon defence and general welfare ; and whosoever should embark 
it in a war of offence, would put it to a test which it is by no 
means calculated to endure. Make it out that Great Britain has 
instigated the Indians on a late occasion, and I am ready for bat- 
tle, but not for dominion. I am unwilling, however, under pres- 
ent circumstances, to take Canada, at the risk of the constitution, 
to embark in a common cause with France, and to be dragged at 
the wheels of the car of some Burr or Bonaparte. For a gentle- 
man from Tennessee, or Genesee, or lake Champlain, there may 
be some prospect of advantage. Their hemp would bear a great 
price by the exclusion of foreign supply. In that, too, the great 
importers are deeply interested. The upper country on the Hud- 
son and the lakes would be enriched by the supplies for the 
troops, which they alone could furnish. They would have the 
exclusive market ; to say nothing of the increased preponderance 
from the acquisition of Canada and that section of the union, which 
the Southern and Western States have already felt so severely in 
the apportionment bill. 

Permit me now, sir, to call your attention to the subject of our 
black population. I will touch this subject as tenderly as possi- 
ble. It is with reluctance that I touch it at all ; but in cases of 
great emergency, the state physician must not be deterred by a 
sickly, hysterical humanity, from probing the wound of his pa- 
tient: he must not be withheld by a fastidious and mistaken deli- 
cacy from representing his true situation to his friends, or even to 
the sick man himself, when the occasion calls for it. What is the 
situation of the slave-holding states ? During the war of the rev- 
olution, so fixed were their habits of subordination, that while the 
whole country was overrun by the enemy, who invited them to 
desert, no fear was ever entertained of an insurrection of the 
.slaves. During a war of seven years with our country in pos- 



AN INCREASE OF THE ARMY. 



263 



session of the enemy, no such danger was ever apprehended. 
But should we, therefore, be unobservant spectators of the progress 
of society within the last twenty years ; of the silent, but power- 
ful change wrought, by time and chance, upon its composition and 
temper ? When the fountains of the great deep of abomination 
were broken up, even the poor slaves did not escape the general 
deluge. The French revolution has polluted even them. Nay, 
there have not been wanting men in this house — witness our Wis- 
lative Legendre, the butcher who once held a seat here — to preach 
upon this floor these imprescriptible rights to a crowded audience 
of blacks in the galleries ; teaching them, that they are equal to 
their masters ; in other words, advising them to cut their throats. 
Similar doctrines have been disseminated by pedlers from New 
England and elsewhere, throughout the southern country ; and 
masters have been found so infatuated as, by their lives and con- 
versation, by a general contempt of order, morality and religion, 
unthinkingly to cherish these seeds of self-destruction to them and 
their families. What has been the consequence? Within the 
last, ten years, repeated alarms of insurrection among the slaves ; 
some of them awful indeed. From the spreading of this infernal 
doctrine, the whole southern country has been thrown into a state 
of insecurity. Men, dead to the operation of moral causes, have 
taken away from the poor slave his habits of loyalty and obedi- 
ence to his master, which lightened his servitude by a double op- 
eration ; beguiling his own cares and disarming his master's sus- 
picions and severity ; and now, like true empirics in politics, you 
are called upon to trust to the mere physical strength of the fetter 
which holds him. in bondage. You have deprived him of all 
moral restraint; you have tempted him to eat of the fruit of the 
tree of knowledge, just enough to perfect him in wickedness ; you 
have opened his eyes to his nakedness ; you have armed his na- 
ture against the hand that has fed, that has clothed him, that has 
cherished him in sickness ; that hand, which, before he became a 
pupil of your school, he had been accustomed to press with re- 
spectful affection. You have done all this — and then show him 
the gibbet and the wheel, as incentives to a sullen, repugnant 
obedience. God forbid, sir, that the Southern States should ever 
see an enemy on their shores, with these infernal principles of 
French fraternity in the van. While talking of taking Canada, 
some of us are shuddering for our own safety at home. I speak 
from facts, when I say, that the night-bell never tolls for fire in 
Richmond, that the mother does not hug her infant more closely 
to her bosom. I have been a witness of some of the alarms in 
the capital of Virginia. 

How have we shown our sympathy with the patriots of Spain, 
or with the American provinces ? By seizing on une of them, 



264 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH ON 



her claim to which we had formerly respected, as soon as the 
parent country was embroiled at home. Is it thus we yield them 
assistance against the arch-fiend, who is grasping at the sceptre of 
the civilized world ? The object of France is as much Spanish- 
America as old Spain herself. Much as I hate a standing army, I 
could almost find it in my heart to vote one, could it be sent to the 
assistance of the Spanish patriots. 

Against whom are these charges of British predilection brought? 
Against men, who, in the war of the revolution, were in the coun- 
cils of the nation, or fighting the battles of your country. And 
by whom are they made ? By runaways chiefly from the British 
dominions, since the breaking out of the French troubles. It is 
insufferable. It cannot be borne. It must and ought, with se- 
verity, to be put down in this house, and out of it to meet the lie 
direct. We have no fellow-feeling for the suffering and oppressed 
Spaniards ! Yet even them we do not reprobate. Strange ! that 
we should have no objection to any other people or government, 
civilized or savage, in the whole world ! The great autocrat of 
all the Russias receives the homage of our hisrh consideration. 
The dey of Algiers and his divan of pirates, are very civil, good 
sort of people, with whom we find no difficulty in maintaining the 
relations of peace and amity. " Turks, Jews and Infidels," Me- 
limelli or the Little Turtle ; barbarians and savages of every clime 
and color, are welcome to our arms. With chiefs of banditti, ne- 
gro or mulatto, we can treat and can trade. Name, however, but 
England, and all our antipathies are up in arms against her. 
Against whom ? Against those whose blood runs in our veins ; 
in common with whom, we claim Shakspeare, and Newton, and 
Chatham, for our countrymen ; .whose form of government is the 
freest on earth, our own only excepted ; from whom every valua- 
ble principle of our own institutions has been borrowed — repre- 
sentation — jury trial — voting the supplies — writ of habeas corpus — 
our whole civil and criminal jurisprudence ; — against our fellow 
Protestants, identified in blood, in language, in religion with our- 
selves. In what school did the worthies of our land, the Wash- 
ington, Henrys, Hancocks, Franklins, Rutledges of America, 
learn those principles of civil liberty, which were so nobly assert- 
ed by their wisdom and valor ? American resistance to British 
usurpation has not been more warmly cherished by these great 
men and their compatriots ; not more by Washington, Hancock 
and Henry, than by Chatham and his illustrious associates in the 
British parliament. It ought to be remembered, too, that the 
heart of the English people was with us. It was a selfish and 
corrupt ministry, and their servile tools, to whom we were not 
more opposed than they were. I trust that none such may ever 
exist among us ; for tools will never be wanting to subserve the 



AN INCREASE OF THE ARMY. 



265 



purposes, nowever ruinous or wicked, of kings and ministers of 
state. I acknowledge the influence of a Shakspeare and a Mil- 
ton upon my imagination, of a Locke upon my understanding, of 
a Sidney upon my political principles, of a Chatham upon qual- 
ities w T hich, would to God, I possessed in common with that illus- 
trious man! of a Tillotson, a Sherlock and a Porteus, upon my 
religion. This is a British influence which I can never shake off. 
I allow much to the just and honest prejudices growing out of the 
revolution. But by whom have they been suppressed, when 
they ran counter to the interests of my country ? By Washing- 
ton. By whom, would you listen to them, are they most keenly 
felt? By felons escaped from the jails of Paris, Newgate and 
Kilmainham, since the breaking out of the French revolution ; 
who, in this abused and insulted country, have set up for political 
teachers, and whose disciples give no other proof of their progress in 
republicanism, except a blind devotion to the most ruthless military 
despotism that the world ever saw. These are the patriots, who 
scruple not to brand with the epithet of tory, the men (looking 
towards the seat of colonel Stewart) by whose blood your liber- 
ties have been cemented. These are they, who hold in such 
keen remembrance the outrages of the British armies, from which 
many of them are deserters. Ask these self-styled patriots 
where they were during the American war (for they are, for the 
most part, old enough to have borne arms), and you strike them 
dumb ; their lips are closed in eternal silence. If it were allow- 
able to entertain partialities, every consideration of blood, lan- 
guage, religion and interest, would incline us towards England ; and 
yet, shall they be alone extended to France and her ruler, whom 
we are bound to believe a chastening God suffers as the scourge 
of a guilty world ? On all other nations he tramples ; he holds 
them in contempt ; England alone he hates ; he would, but he 
cannot despise her ; fear cannot despise ; and shall we disparage 
our ancestors? Shall we bastardize ourselves by placing them 
even below the brigands of St. Domingo ? — with whom Mr. 
Adams negotiated a sort of treaty, for which he ought to have 
been, and would have been impeached, if the people had not pre- 
viously passed sentence of disqualification for their service upon 
him. This antipathy to all that is English, must be French. 

But the outrages and injuries of England, bred up in the prin- 
ciples of the revolution, I can never palliate, much less defend 
them. I well remember flying, with my mother and her new- 
born child, from Arnold and Phillips — and we were driven by 
Tarleton and other British pandours, from pillar to post, while her 
husband was fighting the battles of his country. The impression 
is indelible on my memory; and yet (like my worthy old neigh- 
bor, who added seven buckshot to every cartridge at the battle of 
23 Ll 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH ON 



Guilford, and drew a fine sight at his man) I must be content to 
be called a tory by a patriot of the last importation. Let us not 
get rid of one evil (supposing it possible) at the expense of a 
greater: mutatis mutandis, suppose France in possession of the 
British naval power — and- to her the trident must pass, should 
England be unable to wield it — what would be your condition ? 
What would be the situation of your seaports, and their seafaring 
inhabitants ? Ask Hamburg, Lubec ! Ask Savannah ! What, 
sir, when their privateers are pent up in our harbors by the British 
bull-dogs ; when they receive at our hands every right of hospi- 
tality, from which their enemy is excluded ; when they capture 
in our own waters, interdicted to British armed ships, American 
vessels ; when such is their deportment towards you, under such 
circumstances, what could you expect if they were the uncontrol- 
led lords of the ocean ? Had those privateers at Savannah borne 
British commissions, or had your shipments of cotton, tobacco, 
ashes, and what not, to London and Liverpool, been confiscated, 
and the proceeds poured into the English exchequer, my life upon 
it, you would never have listened to any miserable, wire-drawn 
distinctions between " orders and decrees affecting our neutral 
rights," and " municipal decrees," confiscating, in mass, your 
whole property : you would have had instant war ! The whole 
land would have blazed out in war. And shall republicans be- 
come the instruments of him who has effaced the title of Attila to 
the " scourge of God ? " Yet even Attila, in the falling fortunes 
of civilization, had, no doubt, his advocates, his tools, his minions, 
his parasites, in the very countries that he overrun — sons of that 
soil, whereon his horse had trod, where grass could never after 
grow. If perfectly fresh, instead of being as I am, my memory 
clouded, my intellect stupefied, my strength and spirits exhausted, 
1 could not give utterance to that strong detestation which I feel 
towards (above all other works of the creation) such characters as 
Gengis, Tamerlane, Kouli Khan, or Bonaparte. My instincts in- 
voluntarily revolt at their bare idea — malefactors of the human 
race, who have ground down man to a mere machine of their im- 
pious and bloody ambition ! Yet, under all the accumulated wrongs, 
and insults, and robberies of the last of these chieftains, are we 
not, in point of fact, about to become a party to his views, a part 
ner in his wars ? 

But before this miserable force of ten thousand men is raised to 
take Canada, I bes: o;entlemen to look at the state of defence at 
home ; to count the cost of the enterprise before it is set on foot, 
not when it may be too late ; when the best blood of the country 
shall be spilt, and nought but empty coffers left to pay the cost. 
Are the bounty lands to be given in Canada? It might lessen 
my repugnance to that part of the system, to granting these lands, 



AN INCREASE OF THE ARMY. 



267 



not to these miserable wretches, who sell themselves to slavery for 
a few dollars, and a glass of gin, but, in fact, to the clerks in our 
offices, some of whom, with an income of fifteen hundred or two 
thousand cfbllars, live at the rate of four or five thousand, and yet 
grow rich ; who, perhaps, at this moment, are making out blank 
assignments for these land rights. I beseech the house, before they 
run their heads against this post, Quebec, to count the cost. My 
word for it, Virginia planters will not be taxed to support such a 
war — a war which must aggravate their present distresses — in which 
they have not the remotest interest. Where is the Montgomery, 
or even the Arnold, or the Burr, who is to march to the Point 
Levi ? 

I call upon those professing to be republicans, to make good the 
promises held out by their republican predecessors, when they 
came into power ; promises which, for years afterwards, they hon- 
estly, faithfully fulfilled. We have vaunted of paying off the na- 
tional debt ; of retrenching useless establishments, and yet have 
now become as infatuated with standing armies, loans, taxes, na- 
vies, and war, as ever were the Essex Junto. 

[Mr. Randolph apologized for his very desultory manner of 
speaking. He regretted that his bodily indisposition had obliged 
him to talk, perhaps, somewhat wildly ; yet he trusted some 
method would be found in his madness.] 



/ 



SPEECH OF JOHN C. CALHOUN, 



IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES, 
DECEMEER 12, 1811, 

On the second resolution reported by the committee of foreign relations} 
" That an additional force of ten thousand regular troops ought to be im- 
mediately raised, to serve for three years ; and that a bounty in lands 
ought to be given to encourage enlisunent." 



Mr. Speaker, 

I understood the opinion of the committee of foreign relations 
differently from what the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Randolph) 
lias stated to be his impression. I certainly understood that com- 
mittee as recommending the measures now before the house, as a 
preparation for war ; and such, in fact, was its express resolve, 
agreed to, I believe, by every member except that gentleman. I 
do not attribute any wilful misstatement to him, but consider it 
the effect of inadvertency or mistake. Indeed, the report could 
mean nothing but war or empty menace. I hope no member of 
this house is in favor of the latter. A bullying, menacing system 
has every thing to condemn, and nothing to recommend it : in ex- 
pense it is almost as considerable as war; it excites contempt 
abroad, and destroys confidence here. Menaces are serious things, 
and if we expect any good from them, they ought to be resorted 
to with as much caution and seriousness, as war itself ; and should, 
if not successful, be invariably followed by it. It was not the 
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Grundy) that made this a war 
question. The resolve contemplates an additional, regular force; 
a measure confessedly improper, but as a preparation for war, but 
undoubtedly necessary in that event. Sir, I am not insensible of 
the weighty importance of this question, for the first time submit- 
ted to this house, as a redress of our long list of complaints against 
one of the belligerents ; but, according to my mode of thinking on 
this subject, however serious the question, whenever I am on its 
affirmative side, my conviction must be strong and unalterable. 
War, in this country, ought never to be resorted to. but when it is 
clearly justifiable and necessary ; so much so as not to require the 
aid of logic to convince our reason, nor the ardor of eloquence to 
inflame our passions. There are many reasons why this country 



MR. CALHOUN'S SPEECH, &c. 



269 



should never resort to war but for causes the most urgent and ne- 
cessary. It is sufficient that, under a government like ours, none 
but such will justify it in the eye of the nation ; and, were I not 
satisfied that such is our present cause, I certainly would be no 
advocate of the proposition now before the house. 

Sir, I prove the war, should it ensue, justifiable, by the express 
admission of the gentleman from Virginia ; and necessary, by facts 
undoubted, and universally admitted — such as that gentleman did 
not pretend to controvert. The extent, duration, and character 
of the injuries received; the failure of those peaceful means, here- 
tofore resorted to for the redress of our wrongs, is my proof that it 
is necessary. Why should I mention the impressment of our sea- 
men ) depredation on every branch of our commerce, including the 
direct export trade, continued for years, and made under laws 
which professedly undertake to regulate our trade with other na- 
tions ; negotiation resorted to, time after time, till it is become 
hopeless ; the restrictive system persisted in, to avoid war, and in 
the vain expectation of returning justice ? The evil still grows, 
and in each succeeding year, swells in extent and pretension be- 
yond the preceding. The question, even in the opinion and ad- 
mission of our opponents, is reduced to this single point — which 
shall we do, abandon or defend our own commercial and maritime 
rights, and the personal liberties of our citizens employed in ex- 
erting them ? These rights are essentially attacked, and war is 
the only means of redress. The. gentleman from Virginia has 
suggested none, unless we consider the whole of his speech as 
recommending patient and resigned submission as the best remedy. 
Sir, which alternative this house ought to embrace, it is not for me 
to say. I hope the decision is made already, by a higher authori- 
ty than the voice of any man. It is not for the human tongue to 
instil the sense of independence and honor. This is the work 
of nature — a generous nature that disdains tame submission to 
wrongs. 

This part of the subject is so imposing, as to enforce silence 
even on the gentleman from Virginia. He dared not to deny his 
country's wrongs, or vindicate the conduct of her enemy. 

Only one point of that gentleman's argument had any, the 
most remote, relation to this point. He would not say, we had 
not a good cause of war ; but insisted that it was our duty to define 
that cause. If he means that this house ought, at this stage of 
the proceeding, or any other, to enumerate such violations of our 
rights, as we are willing to contend for, he prescribes a course 
which neither good sense nor the usage of nations warrants. 
When we contend, let us contend for all our rights — the doubtfu 
and the certain, the unimportant and essential. It is as easy to 
struggle, or even more so, for the whole, as a part. At the ter- 



270 



MR. CALHOUN'S SPEECH ON 



mination of the contest, secure all that our wisdom and valor and 
the fortune of the war will permit. This is the dictate of common 
sense ; such also is the usage of nations. The single instance al- 
luded to, the endeavor of Mr. Fox to compel Mr. Pitt to define 
the object of the war against France, will not support the gentle- 
man from Virginia in his position. That was an extraordinary 
war for an extraordinary purpose, and could not be governed by 
the usual rules. It was not for conquest, or for redress of injury 
but to impose a government on France, which she refused to re 
ceive ; an object so detestable, that an avowal dare not be made 
Sir, here I might rest the question. The affirmative of the prop 
osition is established. I cannot but advert, however, to the com 
plaint of the gentleman from Virginia, the first time he was up @± 
this question. He said, he found himself reduced to the necessity 
of supporting the negative side of the question before the afluma- 
tive was established. Let me tell that gentleman, that there is no 
hardship in his case. It is not every affirmative that ought to be 
proved. Were I to affirm, the house is now in session, would it 
be reasonable to ask for proof? He who would deny its truth, on 
him would be the proof of so extraordinary a negative. How then 
could the gentleman, after his admissions, with the facts before him 
and the nation, complain ? The causes are such as to warrant, or 
rather make it indispensable in any nation, not absolutely depend- 
ent, to defend its rights by force. Let him, then, show the reasons 
why we ought not so to defend ourselves. On him, then, is the 
burden of proof. This he has attempted ; he has endeavored to 
support his negative. 

Before I proceed to answer the gentleman particularly, let me 
call the attention of the house to one circumstance ; that is, that 
almost the whole of his arguments consisted of an enumeration of 
evils always incident to war, however just and necessary ; and that, 
if they have any force, it is calculated to produce unqualified sub- 
mission to every species of insult and injury. I do not feel myself 
bound to answer arguments of the above description ; and if I 
should touch on them, it will be only incidentally, and not for the 
purpose of serious refutation. The first argument of the gentle- 
man which I shall notice, is the unprepared state of the country. 
Whatever weight this argument might have, in a question of im- 
mediate war, it surely has little in that of preparation for it. If 
our country is unprepared, let us remedy the evil as soon as pos- 
sible. Let the gentleman submit his plan ; and if a reasonable 
one, I doubt not it will be supported by the house. But, sir, let 
us admit the fact and the whole force of the argument ; I ask 
whose is the fault ? Who has been a member for many years 
past, and has seen the defenceless state of his country even near 
home, under his own eyes, without a single endeavor to remedy so 



AN INCREASE OF THE ARMY. 



271 



serious an evil ? Let him not say, " I have acted in a minority." 
It is. no less the duty of the minority than a majority to endeavor 
to serve our country. For that purpose we are sent here, and 
not for that of opposition. We are next told of the expenses of 
the war, and that the people will not pay taxes. Why not? Is 
it a want of capacity ? What, with one million tons of shipping ; 
a trade of near one hundred million dollars ; manufactures of one 
hundred and fifty million dollars, and agriculture of thrice that 
amount, shall we be told the country wants capacity to raise and 
support ten thousand or fifteen thousand additional regulars ? No ; 
it has the ability, that is admitted ; but will it not have the dispo- 
sition ? Is not the course a just and necessary one ? Shall we 
then utter this libel on the nation ? Where will proof be found 
of a fact so disgraceful ? It is said, in the history of the country 
twelve or fifteen years ago. The case is not parallel. The abil- 
ity of the country has greatly increased since. The object of that 
tax was unpopular. But on this, as well as my memory and al- 
most infant observation at that time serve me, the objection was 
not to the tax, or its amount, but the mode of collection. The 
eye of the nation was frightened by the number of officers ; its 
love of liberty shocked with the multiplicity of regulations. We, 
in the vile spirit of imitation, copied from the most oppressive part 
of European laws on that subject, and imposed on a young and 
virtuous nation all the severe provisions made necessary by cor- 
ruption and long-growing chicane. If taxes should become ne- 
cessary, I do not hesitate to say the people will pay cheerfully. 
It is for their government and their cause, and would be their in- 
terest and duty to pay. But it may be, and I believe was said, 
that the nation will not pay taxes, because the rights violated are 
not worth defending ; or that the defence will cost more than the 
profit. 

Sir, I here enter my solemn protest against this low and " cal- 
culating avarice " entering this hall of legislation. It is only fit for 
shops and counting-houses, and ought not to disgrace the seat of 
sovereignty by its squalid and vile appearance. W 7 henever it 
touches sovereign power, the nation is ruined. It is too short- 
sighted to defend itself. It is an unpromising spirit, always ready 
to yield a part to save the balance. It is too timid to have in it- 
self the laws of self-preservation. It is never safe but under the 
shield of honor. Sir, I only know of one principle to make a na- 
tion great, to produce in this country not the form but real spirit 
of union, and that is, to protect every citizen in the lawful pursuit 
of his business. He will then feel that he is backed by the gov 
ernment — that its arm is his arms, and will rejoice in its increased 
strength and prosperity. Protection and patriotism are reciprocal 
This is the road that all great nations have trod. Sir, I am not 



272 



MR. CALHOUN'S SPEECH ON 



versed in this calculating policy, and will not, therefore, pretend 
to estimate in dollars and cents the value of national independence 
or national affection. I cannot dare to measure in shillings and 
pence the misery, the stripes and the slavery of our impressed sea- 
men ; nor even to value our shipping, commercial and agricultural 
losses under the orders in council and the British system of block- 
ade. I hope I have not condemned any prudent estimate of the 
means of a country, before it enters on a war. This is wisdom, 
the other folly. 

Sir, the gentleman from Virginia has not failed to touch on the 
calamity of war — that fruitful source of declamation, by which pity 
becomes the advocate of cowardice ; but I know not what we have 
to do with that subject. If the gentleman desires to repress the 
gallant ardor of our countrymen by such topics, let me inform him 
that true courage regards only the cause, that it is just and neces- 
sary, and that it despises the pain and danger of war. If he 
really wishes to promote the cause of humanity, let his eloquence 
be addressed to lord Wellesley or Mr. Percival, and not the 
American' congress. Tell them, if they persist in such daring in- 
sult and injury to a neutral nation, that, however inclined to peace, 
it will be bound in honor and interest to resist ; that their patience 
and benevolence, however great, will be exhausted ; that the ca- 
lamity of war will ensue, and that they, in the opinion of wounded 
humanity, will be answerable for all its devastation and misery. 
Let melting pity, a regard to the interests of humanity, stay the 
hand of injustice, and my life on it, the gentleman will not find it 
difficult to call off his country from the bloody scenes of war. We 
are next told of the danger of war ! I believe we are all ready to 
acknowledge its hazard and accidents ; but I cannot think we have 
any extraordinary danger to contend with, at least so much as to 
warrant an acquiescence in the injuries we have received ; on the 
contrary, I believe no war can be less dangerous to internal peace 
or national existence. But we are told of the black population of 
the Southern States. As far as the gentleman from Virginia speaks 
of his own personal knowledge, I will not pretend to contradict 
him ; I only regret that such is the dreadful state of his particular 
part of the country. Of the southern section, I too have some 
personal knowledge, and can say, that in South Carolina no such 
fears in any part are felt: But, sir, admit the gentleman's state- 
ment ; will a war with Great Britain increase the danger ? Will 
the country be less able to repress insurrection ? Had we any 
thing to fear from that quarter, which I sincerely disbelieve, in my 
opinion, the precise time of the greatest safety is during a war, in 
which we have no fear of invasion ; then the country is most on 
its guard ; our militia the best prepared ; and standing force the 
greatest. Even in our revolution, no attempts were made by that 



AN INCREASE OF THE ARMY. 



273 



portion of our population ; and, however the gentleman may 
frighten himself with the disorganizing effects of French principles, 
I cannot think our ignorant blacks have felt much of their baneful 
influence. I dare say, more than one half of them never heard of 
the French revolution. But as great as is the danger from our 
slaves, the gentleman's fears end not there — the standing army is 
not less terrible to him. 

Sir, I think a regular force, raised for a period of actual hostili- 
ties, cannot be called a standing army. There is a just distinction 
between such a force, and one raised as a peace establishment. 
Whatever may be the composition of the latter, I hope the former 
will consist of some of the best materials of the country. The ar- 
dent patriotism of our young men, and the reasonable bounty in 
land, which is proposed to be given, will impel them to join their 
country's standard and to fight her battles ; they will not forget the 
citizen in the soldier, and, in obeying their officer, learn to con- 
temn their constitution. In our officers and soldiers we will find 
patriotism no less pure and ardent than in the private citizen ; but 
if they should be depraved as represented, what have we to fear 
from twenty-five or thirty thousand regulars ? Where will be the 
boasted militia of the gentleman ? Can one million of militia be 
overpowered by thirty thousand regulars ? If so, how can w T e re- 
ly on them against a foe invading our country ? Sir, I have no 
such contemptuous idea of our militia ; their untaught bravery is 
sufficient to crush all foreign and internal attempts on their coun- 
try's liberties. But we have not yet come to the end of the chap- 
ter of dangers. The gentleman's imagination, so fruitful on this 
subject, conceives, that our constitution is not calculated for war, 
and that it cannot stand its rude shock. This is rather extraordi- 
nary : we must then depend nnon the pity or contempt of other 
nations for our existence. The constitution, it seems, has failed in 
its essential part to provide for the common defence.'' 1 No, says 
the gentleman from Virginia, it h competent for a defensive, but not 
an offensive war. It is not necessary for me to expose the error 
of this opinion. Why make the distinction in this instance ? Will 
he pretend to say, that this is an offensive war ; a war of con- 
quest? Yes, the gentleman has dared to make this, assertion, and 
for reasons no less extraordinary than the assertion itself. He 
says our rights are violated on the ocean, and that these violations 
affect our shipping and commercial rights, to which the Canadas 
have no relation. The doctn/e of retaliation has been much 
abused of late by an unnatural '//.tension ; we have now to witness 
a new abuse. The gentleman Worn Virginia has limited it down 
to a point. By his system, i) you receive a blow on the breast, 
you dare not return it on the Lvid ; you are obliged to measure and 
return it on the precise point on which it was received. If you do 

M M 



274 



MR. CALHOUN'S SPEECH ON 



not proceed with this mathematical accuracy, it ceases to be just 
self-defence ; it becomes an unprovoked attack. 

In speaking of Canada, the gentleman from Virginia introduced 
the name of Montgomery with much feeling and interest. Sir, 
there is danger in that name to the gentleman's argument. It is 
sacred to heroism ! It is indignant of submission ! This calls my 
memory back to the time of our revolution ; to the congress of 
'74 and '75. Suppose a speaker of that day had risen and urged 
all the arguments which we have heard on this subject ; had told 
that congress, " Your contest is about the right of laying a tax ; 
the attempt on Canada has nothing to do with it ; the war will be 
expensive ; danger and devastation will overspread our country, 
and the power of Great Britain is irresistible ? " With what senti- 
ment, think you, would such doctrines have been then received ? 
Happy for us, they had no force at that period of our country's 
glory. Had they been then acted on, this hall would never have 
witnessed a great nation convened to deliberate for the general 
good ; a mighty empire, with prouder prospects than any nation 
the sun ever shone on, w r ould not have risen in the West. No: 
we would have been vile, subjected colonies ; governed by that 
imperious rod which Britain holds over her distant provinces. 
Sir, the gentleman from Virginia attributes the preparation for war 
to every thing but its true cause. He endeavored to find it in the 
probable rise of the price of hemp. He represents the people of 
the Western States as willing to plunge our country into war, for 
such base and precarious motives. I will not reason on this point. 
I see the cause of their ardor, not in such base motives, but in 
their known patriotism and disinterestedness. No less mercenary 
is the reason which he attributes to the Southern States. He says 
that the non-importation act has reduced cotton to nothing, which 
has produced a feverish impatience. Sir, I acknowledge the cot- 
ton of our farms is worth but little, but not for the cause assigned 
by the gentleman from Virginia. The people of that section do 
not reason as he does ; they do not attribute it to the efforts of 
their government to maintain the peace and independence of their 
country ; they seo in the low price of their produce the hand of 
foreign injustice ; they know well, without the market of the con- 
tinent, the deep and steady current of supply will glut that of 
Great Britain ; they are not prepared for the colonial stale to 
which again that power is endeavoring to reduce us. The manly 
spirit of that section of our country will not submit to be regulated 
by any foreign power. 

The love of France and the hatred of England has also been 
assigned as the cause of the present measures. France has not 
done us justice, says the gentleman from Virginia, and how can 
we. without partiality, resist the aggressions of England ? I know, 



AX INCREASE OF THE ARMY. 



275 



sir, we have still causes of complaint against France ; but it is of a 
different character from those against England. She professes now 
to respect our rights, and there cannot be a reasonable doubt, but 
that the most objectionable parts of her decrees, as far as they re- 
spect us, are repealed. We have already formally acknowledged 
this to be a fact. I, however, pretest against the whole of the 
principles on which this doctrine is founded. It is a novel doc- 
trine, and nowhere to be found out of this house, that you cannot 
select your antagonist without being guilty of partiality. Sir, 
when two invade your rights, you may resist both, or either, at 
your pleasure. It is regulated by prudence, and not by right. 
The stale imputation of partiality to France is better calculated 
for the columns of a newspaper than for the walls of this house. 
I ask, in this particular, of the gentleman from Virginia, but for the 
same measure which he claims for himself. That gentleman is at 
a loss to account for, what he calls, our hatred to England. He 
asks, How can we hate the country of Locke, of Newton, Hamp- 
den and Chatham; a country having the same language and cus- 
toms with ourselves, and descending from a common ancestry ? 
Sir, the laws of human affections are uniform. If we have so 
much to attach us to that country, powerful, indeed, must be the 
cause which has overpowered it. 

Yes, sir, there is a cause strong enough. Not that occult, 
courtly affection, which he has supposed to be entertained for 
France ; but it is to be found in continued and unprovoked insult 
and injury — a cause so manifest, that the gentleman from Vir- 
ginia had to exert much ingenuity to overlook it. But, sir, here 
I think the gentleman, in his eager admiration of that country, has 
not been sufficiently guarded in his argument. Has he reflected 
on the cause of that admiration ? Has he examined the reasons 
of our high regard for her Chatham ? It is his ardent patriotism ; 
the heroic courage of his mind, that could not brook the least in- 
sult or injury offered to his country, but thought that her interest 
and honor ought to be vindicated at every hazard and expense. 1 
hope, when we are called on to admire, we shall also be asked to 
imitate. I hope the gentleman does not wish a monopoly of those 
great virtues to remain to that nation. The balance of power has 
also been introduced as an argument for submission. England is 
said to be a barrier against the military despotism of France. 
There is, sir, one great error in our legislation. We are ready 
enough to protect the interest of the states ; and it should seem, 
from this argument, to watch over those of a foreign nation, while 
we grossly neglect our own immediate concerns. This argument 
of the balance of power is well calculated for the British parlia- 
ment, but not at all fitted to the American congress. Tell them, 
that they have to contend with a mighty power, and that if they 



276 



MR. CALHOUN'S SPEECH, &c. 



persist in insult and injury to the American people, they will com- 
pel them to throw the whole weight of their force into the scale 
of their enemy. Paint the clanger to them, and if they will desist 
from injury, we, I answer for it, will not disturb the balance. But 
it is absurd for us to talk of the balance of power, while they, by 
their conduct, smile with contempt at our simple, good-natured 
policy. .If, however, in the contest, it should be found, that they 
underrate us, which I hope and believe, and that we can effect the 
balance of power, it will not be difficult for us to obtain such terms 
as our rights demand. I, sir, will now conclude, by adverting to 
an argument of the gentleman from Virginia, used in debate on a 
preceding day. He asked, Why not declare war immediately ? 
The answer is obvious ; because we are not yet prepared. But, 
says the gentleman, such language, as is here held, will provoke 
Great Britain to commence hostilities. I have no such fears. 
She knows well, that such a course would unite all parties here ; a 
thing, which, above all others, she most dreads. Besides, such has 
been our past conduct, that she will still calculate on our patience 
and submission till war is actually commenced. 



277 



SPEECH OF MR. GASTON, 

OF NORTH CAROLINA. 

ON 

THE LOAN BILL, 

DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE 
UNITED STATES. FEBRUARY IS, 1815. 



Mr. Chatrman, 
I fear I am about to engage in a very injudicious attempt. I 
fear that the patience of the committee is exhausted, and that it 
would be idle to hope for their attention. It was originally my 
wish to claim their notice at an early stage of the debate ; but I 
found this wish was not to be effected but by a competition for the 
floor, and I thought such a competition not justified by the nature 
of the remarks which I had to submit. Under these impressions, 
I had made up my mind to wait until some favorable, unoccupied 
interval should be presented ; and I should not now have pre- 
sumed to anticipate other gentlemen, who seem disposed to 
address you, but for some extraordinary observations which have 
just been uttered, and which, in my opinion, demand immediate 
animadversion. 

The object of the bill is to authorize a loan to the government 
of the United States. The precise proposition before you is, to 
declare what sum shall be borrowed; "twenty-five millions of 
dollars." Enormous as is the addition which is thus proposed to 
be made to our debts, could it be shown to be necessary to ac- 
complish any purposes demanded by the honor and welfare of the 
country, it assuredly would meet with no opposition from me. Is 
a loan wanted, a revenue required, to enable the government to 
# pay off its just engagements ; to give security and protection to 
any part of our territory, or any portion of our citizens ; to afford 
to our gallant navy — that precious relic of better days — such 
encouragement and extension as may enable it more effectually to 
vindicate our rights on the element where they have been assailed ? 
—my voice and assistance shall be cheerfully rendered to obtain 
24 



278 



MR. GASTON'S SPEECH 



them. Let the present proposition be withdrawn, and let it be 
moved to fill the blank with such sum as shall be adequate to sup- 
ply any deficiency of revenue wanted for these purposes, and I 
will second the motion. Nay, sir, should the present proposition 
be rejected (for while it is pending a smaller sum cannot be 
moved), and none of those who are most conversant with the state 
of our finances, should come forward with a further proposition, I 
will myself undertake to move the sum which shall appear compe- 
tent to effect all these objects. 

But, sir, this enormous sum is wanted not for these purposes ; 
it is avowedly not necessary, except to*carry on the scheme of 
invasion and conquest against the Canadas. To this scheme I 
have never been a friend ; but to its prosecution now, I have in- 
vincible objections, founded on considerations of justice, humanity, 
and national policy. These objections I wish to explain and 
enforce, and thus avail myself of an opportunity of discussing some 
of the most interesting topics which grow out of the alarming state 
of the nation. I fear that all I can do will avail nothing. But, 
sir, representing a respectable portion of the American people, who 
are suffering with peculiar severity from the pressure of this unfor- 
tunate and mismanaged war ; who, with me, believe no good is to 
grow out of it, and who apprehend, from its continuance, evils, 
compared with which, all they have yet suffered are but trifles 
light as air, I should be unfaithful to them and myself, if I did not 
interpose my best efforts to arrest the downhill career of ruin. 

In performing this duty, I shall certainly say the things I do 
think. Endeavoring to use such language only as is consistent 
with self-respect and decency towards those who differ from me in 
opinion, I mean freely to exercise the right which belongs to my 
situation. Right ! did I say, sir? The expression is inaccurate. 
Once, indeed, there did exist in this house the right of free discus- 
sion. It was once deemed a constitutional privilege for every 
member to bring forward any proposition he deemed beneficial to 
the country, and support it by whatever arguments he could 
adduce ; to offer amendments to the propositions of others, so as 
to render them, in his judgment, more unexceptionable ; and to 
state the reasons of his dissent from any measure on which he was 
called to vote, and endeavor to impress his opinion on others. 
No doubt, a vast portion of the good people of this republic yet 
believe that such is the course of proceedings here. Little do 
they dream of the complicated machinery, by means of which 
every privilege, except that of thinking, is made to depend on the 
pleasure of the country, the whim of the majority. By certain 
interpolations into our practice, but which no where show their 
hideous front in our written code, the system of suppressing the 
libeity of speech is brought to a degree of perfection that almost 



ON THE LOAN BILL. 



279 



astonishes its authors. A gentleman wishes to bring forward an 
original proposition — he must first state it, and obtain permission 
from a majority of the house, to let it be considered, before he can 
show the propriety of adopting it, or ask even for a decision upon 
it. Thus is annihilated the right of originating a proportion. 
But a proposition is originated by others, it is passed through the 
ordeal of consideration, and he is desirous of amending its defects, 
or of exposing its impropriety. This is, perhaps, deemed incon- 
venient by the majority. It may give them trouble, or bring 
forward a discussion which they do not wish the people to hear, 
or detain them too long from their dinners — a new species of 
legerdemain is resorted to. The " previous question," utterly 
perverted from its original and legitimate use, is demanded; the 
demand is supported by a majority. In an instant all the pro- 
posed amendments disappear ; every tongue is so fettered, that 
it can utter but ay or no, and the proposition becomes a law 
without deliberation, without correction, and without debate. And 
this process is called legislation ! And the hall, in which these 
goodly doings are transacted, is sometimes termed the temple of 
liberty ! Sir, this procedure must be corrected, or freedom is 
rejected from her citadel, and wounded in her very vitals. 

Inconveniences also result to the majority, from this tyrannical 
exercise of power, sufficient, perhaps, to counterbalance all the 
benefits which can be derived from it. Gentlemen often complain, 
that the minority do not pursue the practice which is adopted by 
minorities elsewhere. In England, say they, the opposition ad- 
dress the house and the nation only on great fundamental ques- 
tions, involving disputed principles, and do not hang on the skirts 
of every bill, righting the ministry through all the details of their 
measures. Why is not the same course pursued here ? The 
answer is obvious. Here the minority are not allowed to bring 
forward these great fundamental questions ; they have no oppor- 
tunity of showing their views, except such as may be casually 
afforded by some measure of the majority, on which they are good 
natured enough to allow debate. Unless they avail themselves of 
such a bill in every stage of it, as a peg on which to hang their 
observations, they must be utterly mute. Thus it happens, too, 
that there is frequently not any discernible connection between the 
topics discussed, and the subject supposed to be under debate. 

Perhaps the very course I am pursuing is an apt illustration of 
these facts. Some weeks since I submitted to the house a reso- 
lution, which I thought eminently deserving of attention — a 
resolution, " that pending our negotiation with Great Britain, it is 
inexpedient to prosecute a war of invasion and conquest of the 
Canadas." This resolution could not be discussed, for the house 
would not vouchsafe to it a consideration. But as, on the propo- 



230 



MR. GASTON'S SPEECH 



sition now before you, debate is indulged, and has assumed a lati- 
tude that seems to permit every thing connected with the war, I 
am willing to embrace the occasion to support my favorite propo- 
sition, to which a regular hearing has been refused. Grateful 
even for this opportunity, I acknowledge the courtesy which has 
been shown me by the majority ; sorely as I feel the degradation 
of indirectly using as a favor, what, as a freeman and the repre- 
sentative of freemen, I ought openly to enjoy as a right. 

It is far from my design to enter into a particular inquiry as to 
the origin of this war, or as to its causes, whether technical or 
real. Its advocates, vieing with each other in zeal for its justifica- 
tion and continuance, do not precisely agree in opinion, as to its 
causes, or as to the objects for which it is to .be prosecuted. The 
gentleman from Pennsylvania, who presides over your judiciary 
committee (Mr. Ingersoll), in an elaborate argument, seems de- 
sirous to prove (I am not certain which), either that the war is a 
consequence of the violation on the part of Great Britain of his 
favorite principle, "free ships make free goods," or is to result in 
the establishment of this principle. This comprehensive dogma 
the gentleman contends to be a part of the original unadulterated 
code of national law, consecrated by the treaty of Utrecht, stren-. 
uously asserted by Britain herself in her dispute with Spain, in the 
year 1737, recognized in her commercial treaty with France in 
1786, and vitally essential to our maritime interests. The gen- 
tleman from Virginia, whom I yesterday heard with much pleasure 
(Mr. Jackson), dissents from his political friend, and declares that 
this maxim has never been asserted by our government, under 
any administration, as founded on the common law of nations. 
Although the gentleman from Virginia is in this respect unques- 
tionably correct, yet it is not certain that the chairman of the ju- 
diciary committee is altogether erroneous in attributing to the 
administration an expectation of establishing by this war some 
such theory. That the neutral flag shall protect all from capture, 
is a very convenient doctrine for a nation frequently at war with 
an adversar)^ of decidedly superior maritime strength. France, 
who, with occasional short intervals, has been for centuries at war 
with England, has very naturally wished to incorporate this doc- 
trine into the law of nations. Her imperial master has adopted it 
as one of the elementary principles of his new maritime code, 
which he solemnly promulgated in his decree of Berlin, of No- 
vember, 1806 ; and in support of which, he has used every vio- 
lence and stratagem to array the nations of the world into one 
great maritime confederacy. At least as early as the infamous 
Turreau's letter of June, 1809, the executive of this country was 
perfectly apprized of such a confederacy, of the purposes which it 
was to uphold, and of the determination of France to bribe or 



ON THE LOAN BILL. 



281 



compel our accession to it. The decree of the great protector of 
the confederacy, of the date of April, 1811, though probably not 
issued till May, 1812, announced in language sufficiently distinct, 
that this claim had been so far complied with on our part, as to 
exempt from the further application of the penalties of disobedi- 
ence. And our declaration of war, against the sole recusant of 
this imperial theory, was proclaimed by Napoleon to his senate, 
as a spirited and generous exertion, to vindicate the new religion 
of the flag, which, like the superstition of the sanctuary, was to 
protect every fraud and shelter every crime. Extravagant, there- 
fore, as the positions of the gentleman from Pennsylvania may be 
thought by the far greater part of this committee, they may have 
more countenance from the administration, than is generally sus- 
pected. 

The gentleman from Pennsylvania has assigned another cause 
for the war, in which he has obtained the concurrence of several 
of his friends — the instigation, by the British government, of In- 
dian wars. Although, sir, this theme of popular declamation has 
almost become trite ; although the tomahawk and the scalping-knife 
have been so often brandished with rhetorical ambidexterity, that 
their exhibition almost ceases to excite interest, yet far be it from 
me to think or speak lightly of the cruelties of savage warfare, or 
to conceal my utter abhorrence and detestation of them. But it 
is a different, very different question, whether the Canadians have 
armed the Indians to join in defence against a common invader, 
or had, previously to war, instigated them to hostilities against us. 
This last charge I do not believe — no evidence has been given to 
warrant it, that 1 have yet heard. Over the affair of Tippecanoe, 
the commencement of Indian war, there hovers a mystery which 
ought to be dissipated, but which the government will not dispel. 
I have sought, honestly sought, for information. Of official in- 
formation there is little or none. From private sources, not likely, 
in this respect, to mislead (for they are friendly to this war, and 
connected with the western interest and feeling), I learn, that the 
great cause of Indian hostilities is to be found where expe- 
rience and history would prompt us to look for it — is to be found 
in our cupidity for their lands, and their jealousy and distrust of 
our superior intelligence and force. Indian wars have been, until 
a few years back, almost uninterrupted in this country, both before 
and since the revolution. They need no other instigations than 
are to be found in the inconsistent views, interests, claims,. pas- 
sions, and habits of neighboring, yet distinct races of people. 

Sir, general Harrison's treaty of November, 1809, was the mine 
of the great Indian explosion. The Indians complained, I know 
not how justly, that in that treaty they w r ere cheated of lands 
which the parties to it had no right to convey, and never meant tt» 
24* Nn 



282 



MR. GASTON'S SPEECH 



convey. There are gentlemen in this legislature who know that 
Tecumseh immediately afterwards avowed his fixed purpose to 
vindicate by force, and by a union of the red men, the rights of his 
tribe and the menaced independence of the whole race. And we 
all know (the fact is on record) that, shortly after this treaty by 
the British, the governor-general of Canada caused it to be offi- 
cially communicated to the government of the United States, that 
the Indians were meditating hostile designs. 

The British orders in council were, after all, emphatically and 
exclusively the cause of war. And had it not been for very many 
weighty considerations, to be found in the state of the world, in 
the nature of the war in Europe, out of which proceeded this 
violation of neutral rights ; in the conduct of the other mighty 
belligerent, her injuries, her menaces and intrigues, and in the 
peculiar condition of this country, actually growing into unexam- 
pled prosperity, under the very state of things of which we com- 
plained ; — had it not been for these, and considerations like these, 
that, trumpet-tongued, warned us from the gulf into which we 
were about to plunge, the orders in council would have justified 
the resort to war. At all events, they formed what might be 
termed a sufficient technical cause of hostilities, much better than 
often figures, with conspicuous effect, in the manifestos of princes, 
under the specious names of justice, independence, and violated 
rights. But, sir, scarcely had the fatal step been taken, and the 
destinies of our nation risked on the fortune of the sword, when 
the obnoxious orders were revoked, the causes of war removed, 
and an honorable opportunity afforded of returning to the happy 
state of peace, commerce, and successful enterprise. How grate- 
ful must not the executive of a country, whose policy was 
fundamentally pacific — how grateful must it not have been for this 
happy rescue from the horrors of war ! How rejoiced, that all 
had been effected without a struggle, which it was the object to 
obtain by a bloody and precarious contest ! Exulting to show, 
that when it unsheathed the sword, no passion but duty urged the 
reluctant deed, surely it hastened to return the unstained weapon 
to the scabbard, and extend the blessed olive-branch of peace. 
Was it so? Sir, I never can think of the conduct of the executive 
upon this occasion, without mingled feelings of surprise, regret, 
and anger. It cannot be accounted for but by .an infatuation the 
most profound — an infatuation which is not yet dissipated, and 
which should fill every breast with apprehensions of that dreadful 
result, which, in the wisdom of Providence, is preceded by the 
darkened councils " of rulers. But it is entirely a mistake, says 
the gentleman from Pennsylvania. The orders in council never 
were revoked ; they were indeed withdrawn, but under a decla- 
ration., asserting the right to reenact them, should the violence of 



ON THE LOAN BILL. 



2S3 



France, acquiesced in by America, renew the necessity for them. 
Will the administration, sir, bring forward this excuse ? Will they 
take this ground ? No, sir, they cannot : they dare not. The 
president has told the nation, that the revocation of the orders 
was substantially satisfactory ; in his peculiar phraseology, " the 
repeal of the orders in council was susceptible of explanations 
meeting the just views of the government." How could he do 
otherwise after his proclamation of the 2d of November, 1810, 
declaring the French edicts so revoked as to cease to be injurious 
to our rights ; a proclamation founded solely on the letter of the 
duke de Cadore, of the 5th of August, promising a revocation. 
Does the gentleman recollect the celebrated " Bien entendu," 
or proviso annexed to this letter : " Provided, that in consequence 
of this declaration, the British government shall revoke their or- 
ders in council, and renounce their new principles of blockade, or 
America shall cause her rights to be respected, conformably to the 
act which you have communicated?" Does the gentleman re- 
member the tortuous and labored efforts of Mr. Secretary Monroe, 
to explain this proviso into a condition subsequent ? to prove 
that it was designed only to exert the right of France to reenact 
these decrees if Britain should persist in her orders, and we for- 
bear from resisting them ? Such a condition, subsequently an- 
nexed to a promised revocation of the French decrees, had no 
effect to impair its force — but the same annexed in terms to the 
actual revocation of the British orders, renders it entirely null ! 
No, sir, the executive cannot take this ground ; his direct friends 
will not take it for him. In the emphatic language of the eloquent 
Junius, this would, indeed, " resemble the termagant chastity of a 
prude, who prosecutes one lover for a rape, while she solicits the 
lewd embraces of another." 

But can it be urged, say the gentlemen, that the revocation of 
the orders in council removed all our causes of complaint, and left 
us nothing more to demand of the enemy ? No, sir, this is not 
urged. But it is contended, that as the revocation of the orders 
in council removed the cause of war, hostilities should instantly 
have been suspended, and a fair, manly effort made to settle by 
negotiation all unadjusted differences which had not caused the 
war. A question of much importance and delicacy remained to 
be settled in relation to the search for British seamen on board our 
merchant vessels, and the occasional impressment of Americans. 
Under every administration of our country, this question had ex- 
cited great interest, and been attended with much difficulty. Of 
late, indeed, it had in some degree lost its interest, and partly be- 
cause of the comparative rare occurrence of the practice. The 
restrictive anti-commercial system had expelled native and foreign 
seamen in vast numbers from our country, and almost removed the 



284 



MR. GASTON'S SPEECH 



temptations to an exercise of what the British claimed as a mari- 
time right. For five years before the war, the dispute had, in 
fact, slept. Subjects more important pressed themselves on our 
nation, and while these pressed, that was postponed as a matter 
for future arrangement. But out of these new subjects a contro- 
versy arose which issued in war. It had scarcely been declared 
before the matter in controversy was arranged to our satisfaction, 
by the voluntary act of the enemy. What was our plain, obvious 
course — the course of duty and of policy? Sheath the sword un- 
til it is ascertained whether the dispute, which has been laid aside 
for future arrangement, and which, in consequence of the adjust- 
ment of more pressing concerns, is now properly presented to 
notice, can or cannot be amicably settled. Even tyrants pro- 
nounce war the " ultima ratio regum," the last resort of princes. 
Nothing can justify the exercise of force but the inability to obtain 
right by other means. 

You had not supposed your just claims on the subject of seamen 
unattainable by negotiation, or you would not have reserved them 
Tor years as a subject for negotiation — and if they be thus attain- 
able, how will ye answer to God and the country for the blood and 
treasure uselessly, criminally expended ? This mode of thinking, 
sir, seems to me very straight, and quite in accordance with good old 
notions of practical morality ; besides, it is the incumbent duty of 
him who seeks justice first to render it. 

Whatever our claims on Great Britain might have been in rela- 
tion to seamen, she was not without her claims on us. At a time 
when her floating bulwarks were her sole safeguard against slavery, 
she could not view, without alarm and resentment, the warriors 
who should have manned those bulwarks pursuing a more gainful 
occupation in American vessels. Our merchant ships were crowd- 
ed with British seamen ; most of them deserters from their ships- 
of-war, and all furnished with fraudulent protections to prove them 
American. To us they were not necessary ; they ate the bread 
and bid down the wages of native seamen whom it was our first 
duty to foster and encourage. 

To their own country they were necessary, essentially necessary. 
They were wanted for her defence in a moment of unprecedented 
peril. Ought we not, then, while seeking to protect our own sea- 
men from forced British service, to have removed from her seamen 
the temptation to desert their country and to supplant ours at 
home ? Why need I ask the question ? Your seaman's bill, as it 
is called, enacted into a law since the war, is an acknowledgment 
that this ought to have been done : however deceptive some of its 
provisions may appear, its very principle is to restore to Britain her 
seamen, and save our own from her service. Unless you believed 
this principle right, it was the meanest of degradations, at such a 



ON THE LOAN BILL. 



285 



time to pass such a law ; and if it was right, then you had justice to 
render, as well as to seek. Had you pursued this plain path of right, 
had you suspended hostilities, you would have consulted also the 
true policy of your country. An unconditional proposition for an 
armistice upon the revocation of the orders, or an unconditional ac- 
ceptance of the offer of an armistice, would have passed for magna- 
nimity. The disgraces which have since foully distained our 
military character were not then anticipated. The world would 
have believed, your enemy would have believed, that you sus- 
pended your career of conquest because the war had owed its 
origin not to ambition, but to duty — because you sought not ter- 
ritory, but justice — because you preferred an honest peace to the 
most splendid victory. With the reputation of having command- 
ed, by your attitude of armor, a repeal of the offensive orders, you 
would have evinced a moderation which must have secured the 
most beneficial arrangements on the question of seamen. 

But, sir, this was not done. No armistice could obtain the 
approbation of the executive, unless it was preceded by an aban- 
donment, formal or informal, of the British claim to search for 
their seamen on board our merchant vessels. As an evidence of 
this abandonment, the exercise of the claim must, by stipulation, 
be suspended during the armistice, and this suspension was to be 
the price of its purchase. Even without an armistice, no " ar- 
rangement " w T as to be deemed a fit subject for negotiation, which 
should not be predicated on " the basis " of an exclusion from our 
vessels, by our laws, of their seamen, and an absolute prohibition 
of search by their officers. This, sir, was taking very lofty 
ground ; but at that moment the Canada fever raged high, and the 
delirium of foreign conquest was at its acme. In a few weeks the 
American flag was to wave triumphant on the ramparts of Que- 
bec. The proposition for an armistice from the government of 
Canada was utterly inadmissible. In the language of our secreta- 
ry of state, it wanted reciprocity. "The proposition is not recip- 
rocal, because it restrains the United States from acting where 
their power is greatest, and leaves Great Britain at liberty, and 
gives her time to augment her forces in our neighborhood." 

Mr. Russell did condescend to offer an armistice to the enemy, 
upon the condition of yielding as preliminary, even a suspension 
of arms, all that could be extorted by the most triumphant war. 
But even he, in his pacific proposition, could not refrain from ex- 
ulting at the glorious conquests, that would inevitably be made if 
submission was refused or delayed. " Your lordship is aware of 
the difficulties with which a prosecution of the war, even for a 
short period, must necessarily embarrass all future attempts at ac 
commodation. Passions, exasperated by injuries ; alliances or 
conquests on terms which forbid their abandonment, will inevitably 



-286 



MR. GASTON'S SPEECH 



hereafter imbitter and protract a contest which might now be so 
easily and happily terminated." I cannot forbear, sir, from one 
remark at the ' awful squinting ' in this letter, at an alliance with 
France. Gentlemen are sensitive when the possibility of such a 
connection is intimated. The very suspicion of such a design in 
the cabinet is viewed as a calumny. Here the accredited agent 
of the American executive proclaims such a connection, such an 
alliance as inevitable — proclaims it in an official communication to 
the public enemy. The declaration is laid before congress and 
the people, by the president, unaccompanied by any disavowal. 
The minister is not censured. For his very conduct in this em- 
ployment, he is raised to the highest grade of foreign ministers ; 
and, in spite of the reluctance of the senate to confirm his nomi- 
nation, he is pressed upon them by the president until their assent 
to his appointment is extorted. I dwell not upon this topic, for I 
confess to you the honest fears which once congealed my heart 
are now dissipated. The sun of national freedom has burst forth 
from behind the portentous eclipse that "with fear of change " had 
perplexed the darkened world. Napoleon, no longer invincible, 
stripped of the false glare which splendid crime threw around his 
character, is no longer eulogized as " supereminent," but de- 
nounced by the champions of administration as an " usurper." 
No one courts the friendship of a fallen tyrant ! 

It is not for me to say in what manner the dispute about sea- 
men is to be settled. On this subject I have no hesitation, how- 
ever, in giving my general sentiments. It is the duty of this 
government to protect its seamen (I mean its native seamen) 
from the forced service of any and every power on earth, so far 
as the strength of the country can obtain for them protection. 
True it is, that in my opinion the number of impressed Americans 
bears no reasonable pioportion to the number alleged, but their 
number has been large enough to render the grievance a serious 
one ; and be they more or less, the right to the protection of their 
country is sacred, and must be regarded. The government would 
forfeit its claims to the respect and affection of its citizens, if it 
omitted any rational means to secure the rights of American sea- 
men from any actual violation. Seek to obtain this security by 
practical means. If you cannot by substitute obtain an abandon- 
ment of the right or practice to search our vessels, regulate it so 
as to prevent its abuse — waiving for the present, not relinquishing 
your objections to the right. Do all that can fairly be asked of 
you to supersede the necessity of the practice. When this is 
done, and you should nevertheless fail ; when war is rendered 
necessary to obtain a practical and reasonable security for Ameri- 
can seamen against the abuses of impressment, then, sir, that war 
is just. Whoever may question its expediency, none, who admit 



ON THE LOAN BILL. 



287 



that wars may ever be justly waged, can feel any conscious scru- 
ples in yielding it support. 

This, sir, is no late opinion of mine. It has been long and 
publicly avowed ; not, indeed, as a pledge to my constituents, as 
my friend and colleague (Mr. Murphy) has remarked — we do not 
deal in pledges — but because it is my habit to be frank when no 
duty commands concealment. Nor is it strange that I should feel 
attached to the rights of American sailors. I am a native of the 
seaboard. Many of the playmates of my infancy have become 
the adventurous ploughmen of the deep. Seafaring men are 
among my strongest personal and political friends. And for their 
true interests — their fair rights — I claim to feel a concern as sincere, 
and a zeal as fervent as can be boasted by any gentleman from the 
interior, or from beyond the mountains, who has heard of them, 
but known them not. 

Has the prosecution of your scheme of invasion and conquest 
against the Canadas a tendency to secure these rights and advance 
these interests ? That, sir, is a momentous question, on which it 
is the duty of every man in authority to reflect dispassionately, 
and with a fixed purpose to attain the truth. Unless this tenden- 
cy be manifest, and morally certain, every motive, which can be 
addressed to an honest heart and intelligent mind, forbids its pros- 
ecution at the present moment. Make a fair comparison of its 
certain or probable ills with its possible gains, and then pronounce 
the sentence which justice, humanity, and policy demand ; and a 
suffering nation will bless your decision. 

There is something in the character of a war made upon the 
people of a country, to force them to abandon a government which 
they cherish, and to become the subjects or associates of their in- 
vaders, which necessarily involves calamities beyond those inci- 
dent to ordinary wars. Among us some remain who remember 
the horrors of the invasion of the revolution; and "others of us 
have hung with reverence on the lips of narrative old age, as it 
related the interesting tale." Such a war is not a contest be- 
tween those only who seek for renown in military achievements, 
or the more humble mercenaries " whose business 'tis to die." 
It breaks in upon all the charities of domestic life, and interrupts 
all the pursuits of industry. The peasant quits his plough, and 
the mechanic is hurried from his shop, to commence, without ap- 
prenticeship, the exercise of the trade of death. The irregularity 
of the resistance which is opposed to the invader, its occasional 
obstinacy and occasional intermission, provoking every bad passion 
of his soldiery, is the excuse for plunder, lust, and cruelty. These 
atrocities exasperate the sufferers to revenge ; and every weapon 
which anger can supply, and every device which ingenious hatred 
can conceive, is used to inflict vengeance on the detested foe 



2S8 



MR. GASTON'S SPEECH 



% 

There is yet a more horrible war than this. As there is no an- 
ger so deadly as the anger of a friend, there is no war so ferocious 
as that which is waged between men of the same blood, and for- 
merly connected by the closest ties of affection. The pen of the 
historian confesses its inability to describe, the fervid fancy of the 
poet cannot realize, the horrors of a civil war. This invasion of 
Canada involves the miseries of both these species of war. You 
carry fire and sword amongst a people who are " united against 
you," say your generals, "to a man" — amongst a people who are 
happy in themselves, and satisfied with their condition, view you 
not as coming to emancipate them from thraldom, but to reduce 
them to a foreign yoke — a people long and intimately connected 
with the bordering inhabitants of our country by commercial inter- 
course, by the ties of hospitality, by the bonds of affinity and of 
blood — a people, as to every social and individual purpose, long 
identified with your own. It must be that such a war will rouse 
a spirit of sanguinary ferocity, that will overleap every holy barrier 
of nature and venerable usage of civilization. Where will you find 
an authenticated instance of this ferocity, that more instantaneous- 
ly compels the shuddering abhorrence of the heart, than the fact 
asserted by my eloquent friend from New Hampshire (Mr. Web- 
ster), "the bayonet of the brother has been actually opposed to 
the breast of the brother." Merciful Heaven ! that those who 
have been rocked in the same cradle by the same maternal hand — 
who have imbibed the first genial nourishment of infant existence 
from the same blessed source, should -be forced to contend in im- 
pious strife for the destruction of that being derived from their 
common parents ! It should not be so ! Every feeling of our 
nature cries aloud against it ! 

One subject is intimately connected with this Canadian war, 
which demands the most thorough and deliberate examination. I 
tremble to approach it thus incidentally, lest I injure the cause of 
humanity and truth, by a cursory vindication. And yet I dare 
not altogether omit it, because I fear an opportunity of full consid- 
eration will not be presented, and it is of an urgency and a magni- 
tude that forbid it to be overlooked. I mean, sir, the falsely- 
called system of retaliation, which threatens to impart to the war 
a character of barbarity which has not its parallel in the modern an- 
nals of Christendom. Twenty-three persons of your invading army, 
who were taken prisoners by the enemy at the battle of Queens 
town, in Canada, have been sent to England as British subjects, 
to be tried for treason. To deter the enemy from executing the 
law upon these unhappy men, our executive has ordered into 
close custody an equal number — not of American citizens invading 
our country (this would, indeed, be retaliation) — but of British 
prisoners, who have committed no crime. It is avowed that 



ON THE LOAN BILL. 



289 



these shall be put to instantaneous death, if the men sent to Eng- 
land should be convicted and executed. The British government 
has proceeded, in return, to confine a corresponding number of 
Americans, as hostages, for the safety of these British prisoners, 
under the same determination and avowal. This has been again 
retaliated on our side, and the retaliation retorted by the enemy ; 
so that an indiscriminate and universal destruction of the prisoners 
on each side is the menaced consequence of the execution of one 
of the presumed Englishmen, ordered home for trial. Before we 
enter upon this career of cold-blooded massacre, it behoves us, by 
every obligation which we owe to God, to our fellow men, and to 
ourselves, to be certain that the right is with us, or that the duty 
is imperative. If, in a moment of excited feeling, we should heed- 
lessly enact the fatal deed which consigns thousands of the gallant 
and the brave Americans and Britons to an ignominious death, 
and should afterwards discover that the deed was criminal ; that 
the blood of the innocent is upon us, and the cries of their father- 
less infants have ascended against us to the throne of the Most 
High, how shall we silence the reproaches of conscience; how 
atone for the wide-spread and irreparable mischief ; or how efface 
from the American name the infamous stain that will be stamped 
upon it ? With motives thus awfully obligatory to a correct de- 
cision, we are in imminent danger of error, from causes of which 
we are not aware. A portion of our population, inconsiderable in 
number, as compared with the whole mass, but influential, because 
of their activity, violence, boldness, and their control of the popu- 
lar presses, — I mean, sir, that part of naturalized citizens, who, not 
content with pursuing the private occupations of industry, under- 
take to manage the affairs of state, or teach us how they should be 
managed, — have systematically and zealously labored to dissemi- 
nate false principles, and excite prejudices and passions calculated 
to mislead the public mind. 

The law against the alienation of allegiance is no relict of tyr- 
anny ; it is founded in the analogy of nature, and essential to the 
harmony of the world. There is a striking similitude between 
the duties of a citizen to his country, and those of a son to his 
father. Indeed, sir, what is the word country but a comprehen- 
sive phrase, embracing all those charities which grow out of the 
domestic relations of parents, children, kindred and friends ? 
When the boy has attained manhood, and the father's care is no 
longer necessary to guard him from daily harms, he is at liberty to 
quit the parental roof, to become the inmate of another family, 
there form connections essential to his happiness, and take upon 
himself obligations of respect and tenderness, as the adopted son 
of other parents. But is nature's first great bond utterly severed ? 
Can he return at the bidding of his new friends, ravage and oe 
25 Oo 



290 



MR. GASTON'S SPEECH 



stioy the home of his childhood, and pollute it with the life-blood 
of those from whom he received life ? Would this be but an ordi- 
nary trespass, a common homicide, which provocation might ex- 
tenuate, excuse, or even justify ? An association, sir, formed by 
a resurrection of the wretches who have died on the gibbet, would 
disdain such a principle in their code. What is the jargon of 
modern expatriation, but the same principle interpolated into the 
code of nations ? The peace and independence of every state, 
and of none more than ours, demand that the citizen should not 
be released from the just claims of his country by the interference 
of foreign powers. Give to such interference the effect, and every 
nation is made dependent upon the arbitrary exercise of a foreign 
right to control and regulate its vital concerns. The Spanish do- 
minions to the south, and the British territories to the north, have 
tempted from us many of our boldest spirits. Let them go — let 
them there enjoy every privilege, if they can find it, which in our 
happy country is given to the fugitive European ; every privilege 
which is essential to their comfort. Let them pursue in tranquilli- 
ty their industrious occupations — realize the profits of enterprise, 
and be protected from every invasion of individual right. In re- 
turn for these advantages, let them, like the Europeans whom we 
naturalize, render a cheerful obedience to the laws, perform every 
social duty which is assigned to them, and contribute to the sup- 
port of the government a fair proportion of their gains. But per- 
mit them not to forget the country which gave them birth and 
protected their infancy. Suffer them not with impunity to be 
converted into hostile tribes, whose numbers may be swelled from 
day to day by the factious, the restless, and the criminal, who 
have but to pass an ideal line, and the duty of obedience is con- 
verted into the right to destroy. Unless I am greatly deceived, 
the Jaw of England must be suffered to have its course with the 
individuals, if natives of England, and migrating to us since the 
revolution, who are sent thither for trial. Whether they ought to 
be executed, if convicted, is a very different question. Consider- 
ing the intimate connection which common origin, language, and 
manners, and a long and intimate commerce has heretofore induced 
between the countries, and the consequent interchange of their 
inhabitants ; remembering, too, that general laws are often cruel 
in their application to particular cases, the executive authority in 
that country is bound by the strongest motives to consult the dic- 
tates of humanity, and forbear the too rigorous exercise of right. 
But if these considerations should not there prevail, and the severe 
penalty of the law of treason is exacted, as of right it may be, 
shall we^ without right, without the semblance of law, coldly mur- 
der those who are in our power, who have committed no treason 
against us. ? and against whom crime is not pretended ? Is this 



ON THE LOAN BILL. 



291 



called retaliation ? Britain executes British traitors serving in the 
American army, regularly tried and convicted of treason, and we, 
in return, execute — whom? American traitors, serving in the 
British army, and convicted of treason? No, but faithful, loyal 
men, bearing arms in the cause of their native country ! tried by 
no law ! offenders against no law ! Sir, the pretension is mon- 
strous. I have met with no instance of such a pretension being 
ever asserted in a civilized country. Did Philip, of Spain, retali- 
ate in this way for the execution of Dr. Story ? Did France retali- 
ate for the execution of colonel Townly ? Did Britain thus re- 
taliate for the execution of the French emigrants taken at Quibe- 
ron ? I have heard it said, that Napper Tandy, an Irishman, 
naturalized in France, was surrendered upon a threat of retaliation 
from France. I doubt the fact ; the only evidence of it is in a 
note to an evidently partial and one-sided account of his trial, in 
a collection of Curran's speeches. In no authentic register have 
I been able to find it. But if it were true, the note itself states, 
that the ground on which he was demanded, was not that he had 
been naturalized by France, and therefore not liable to be execu- 
ted for treason ; but because he had been unjustly seized at Ham- 
burg, a neutral territory, and ought to be returned. The bold 
Wolfe Tone, Tandy's associate, and, like him, an officer of 
France, but not, like him, arrested in a violated neutral territory, 
was neither demanded nor delivered. Condemned to death, he 
changed the mode of its execution by committing suicide. And 
shall my country, claiming to excel in humanity, as it excels in 
freedom, the nations of Europe, shall it be the first to avow a 
monstrous, unfounded pretension, and vindicate it by innocent 
blood ? Shall it teach a lesson of barbarity to the hardened chief- 
tains of slaughter, of which they were before ignorant? Shall it 
seek to protect foreigners from the vengeance of their sovereigns, 
at the cost of immolating its own citizens ? Shall it doom a revo- 
lutionary Winchester, or a gallant Winder, to a shameful death, 
because it cannot save alien traitors from their legal fate ? 

Think, for a moment, sir, on the consequences, and deem it not 
unworthy of you to regard them. True courage shuts not its eyes 
upon danger, or its result. It views steadily, and calmly resolves 
whether they ought to be encountered. Already has the Cana- 
dian war a character sufficiently cruel, as Newark, Buffalo, and 
Niagara can testify. But when the spirit of ferocity shall have 
been maddened by the vapor steaming from the innocent blood 
that shall stagnate around every depot of prisoners, then will it 
become a war, not of savage, but of demoniac character. Your 
part of it may, perhaps, be ably sustained. Your way through 
the Canadas may be traced afar off, by the smoke of their burning 
villages. Your path may be marked by the blood of their furious 



292 



MR. GASTON'S SPEECH 



peasantry. You may render your course audible by the frantic 
shrieks of their women and children. But your own sacred soil 
will also be the scene of this drama of fiends. Your exposed and 
defenceless seaboard, the seaboard of the south, will invite a terri- 
ble vengeance. That seaboard which has been shamefully neg- 
lected, and is at this moment without protection, has been already 
invaded. But an invasion, after the war shall have assumed its 
unmitigated form of carnage, and woe, and wickedness, must be 
followed with horrors which imagination can but faintly conceive. 
I will not trust myself to tell you all I feel, all my constituents feel, 
upon this subject ; but I will say to the gentleman from Pennsyl- 
vania, that when he alludes to the probability that an intestine foe 
may be roused to assassination and brutality, he touches a chord 
that vibrates to the very heart. 

Yes, sir, I live in a state whose misfortune it is to contain the 
materials out of which may be made such a foe — a foe that will 
be found every where — in our fields, our kitchens, and our cham- 
bers ; a foe, ignorant, degraded by habits of servitude, uncurbed 
by moral restraints, whom no recollections of former kindness will 
soften, and whom the remembrance of severity will goad to 
frenzy ; from whom nor age, nor infancy, nor beauty, will find 
reverence or pity; and whose subjugation will be but another 
word for extermination. Such a foe, sir, may be added to fill up 
the measure of our calamities. Let me not be misunderstood : let 
no gentleman misconceive my meaning. Do I state these conse- 
quences to intimidate or deter you ? I think better of my coun- 
trymen. I hope and believe, in the language of Wilkinson to 
Provost, the Americans will not be deterred from pursuing what 
is right, by any dread of consequences. No, sir, I state them to 
rouse your attention and waken your scrutiny into the correctness 
of the course you are pursuing. If, on mature deliberation, you 
are sure that you are right, proceed, regardless of what may 
happen : 

" Justum et tenacem propositi virum — 
Si fractus allabatur orbis, 
Impavidum ferientruinse." 

But reflect well, I conjure you, before reflection is too late. Let 
not passion or prejudice dictate the decision. If erroneous, its 
reversal may be decreed by a nation's miseries, and by the world's 
abhorrence. 

Mr. Chairman, turning from the gloomy view of the effects of 
the Canada war, my attention is arrested by another consequence 
likely to follow from it, on which I will not long detain you, but 
which is not less interesting nor less alarming. In proportion as 
gentlemen become heated in their pursuit of conquest, and are 
baffled in their efforts to overtake it, the object becomes more val- 



ON THE LOAN BILL. 



293 



uable in their estimation, and success is more identified with their 
pride. The conquest of Canada, contemplated as an easy sport, 
without a fixed design to keep it to secure, or surrender it to pur- 
chase rights, has from its difficulty swelled into an importance 
which causes it to be valued above all rights. Patriotism was re- 
lied on to fill the ranks of the invading army; but it did not suffi- 
ciently answer the call. These ranks, however, must be filled. 
Avarice is next resorted to. The most enormous price is bid for 
soldiers, that was ever offered in any age or country. Should this 
fail, what is the next scheme ? There is no reserve or conceal- 
ment. It has been avowed that the next scheme is a conscription. 
It is known that this scheme w T as recommended, even at this ses- 
sion, by the war department ; and that it was postponed only to try 
first the effect of enormous bounty. The freemen of this country 
are to be draughted from the ranks of the militia, and forced abroad 
as military machines, to wage a war of conquest ! Sir, I have been 
accustomed to consider the little share which I have in the con- 
stitution of these United States, as the most valuable patrimony I 
have to leave to those beings in whom I hope my name and re- 
membrance to be perpetuated. But I solemnly declare, that if 
such a doctrine be ingrafted into the constitution, I shall regard it 
as without value, and care not for its preservation. Even in 
France, where man, inured to despotism, has become so passive 
and subservient, as almost to lose the faculty of feeling oppression, 
and the capacity to perceive it, even there, sir, the tyranny of 
conscription rouses him to the assertion of his innate freedom, to 
struggle against slavery in its most malignant form. No, sir, not 
the dread of all the severe punishments ordained for refractory 
conscripts, not the " peine du boulet," the " travaux publiques." 
nor death itself, can stupefy him into seeming submission. He 
yields only to absolute force, and is marched to the field of glory 
manacled and handcuffed. And is such a principle to be intro- 
duced into our benign, our free institution ? Believe me, the at- 
tempt will be fatal — it cannot succeed but by military terror. It 
will be the signal for drawing the sword at home. 

Americans are not fitted to be the slaves of a system of French 
conscription, the most detestable of the inventions of tyranny. 
Sir, I hear it whispered near me, this is not worse than the im- 
pressment of seamen. It is worse, infinitely worse. Impressment 
forces seamen to serve in the public ships of their country, instead 
of pursuing their occupation in the merchant service. It changes 
their employment to one more rigorous, of longer continuance, of 
greater danger. But it is yet employment of the same kind. It 
is yet employment for which they are fitted by usage and educa- 
tion. But conscription is indiscriminate in the victims of its tyran 
ny. The age, not the pursuit of the conscript, is the sole criterion 
25* 



•294 



MR. GASTON'S SPEECH 



of his fitness. Whatever be his habits, whatever his immediate 
views, whatever his designed occupation in life, a stern mandate 
tears him from the roof of his father, from the desk, the office, the 
plough, or the workshop, and he is carried far from home to fight, 
in foreign climes, the battles of ambition. 

But. sir, if conscription were not worse than impressment, ] 
should not lose my objection to it. I am not prepared to assent 
to the introduction of either conscription or impressment into my 
country. For all the British territories in the western world, I 
would not fight for sailors' rights — yet rivet on our citizens a French 
conscription ! Fight for rights on the ocean, and annihilate the 
most precious of all rights at home — the right of a freeman never to 
De forced out of his own country ! How alarming is the infatuation 
of that zeal, which, in its ardor for attaining its object, tramples 
in the dust objects of infinitely higher price ! 

What is the probability of success in this scheme of conquest, is 
a topic on which I mean not to enlarge. Jt is not necessary that I 
should, for others have ably discussed it. That you may take Up- 
per Canada, that you may overrun the lower province, I believe ; 
but that you will take Quebec, while the mouth of the St. Law 
rence is commanded by a hostile fleet, I cannot believe ; if an op- 
posite thought gets possession of my imagination, I find it springing 
from that impulse of the heart which makes me fancy victory perch- 
ed on the standard of my country, and not the result of an ex- 
ertion of the understanding. But, sir, if you should conquer the 
Canadas, subdue Nova Scotia, and possess yourself of all the Brit- 
ish territories in America ; if, after impoverishing your country by 
ruinous loans, and grinding down your people by oppressive taxes, 
you should wade at last through the horrors of invasion, massacre 
of prisoners, a servile war, and a military conscription, to the now 
darling object of your wishes, I pray you, sir, what is then to be 
done ? What do you design to do with the conquered territory ? 
W r e will keep it, say the gentlemen from Vermont and Pennsyl- 
vania (Mr. Bradley and Mr. Ingersoll). We will keep it, because 
't is an object with our people, because it will keep off Indian wars, 
and retribute us for the wrongs we have sustained. I believe, in- 
deed, that, if conquered, there will be a powerful party to the 
north and west that will not consent to part with it, with whom it 
is an object. But how shall it be kept ? As a conquered prov- 
ince ? To retain it as such against the efforts of an exasperated, 
though conquered people within, and the exertions of a powerful, 
proud, and irritated enemy without, that enemy master of the sea, 
always able to invade and succor the invaders, will require a mili- 
tary strength and a pecuniary expenditure not less continued or 
less in amount than were demanded to take it. Such a conquest 
is never finished ; when nominally effected, it is to be begun. 



ON THE LOAN BILL. 



^95 



But we will incorporate it into the Union — ay, this woula be 
indeed a pleasant result. Let my southern friends — let gentlemen 
who represent slave-holding states attend to this. How would this 
project take at home ? What would their constituents give to have 
half a dozen new states made out of the Canadas ? It is, besides, 
so notable an expedient for strengthening the nation, and so per- 
fectly in accordance with the principles of our form of government. 
We are to force men into an association, the very life of which is 
freedom, and the breath of that life unrestrained choice ! . And to 
give vigor to the nation, we are to admit into its councils, and into 
a free participation of its power, men whose dislike of its govern- 
ment has been strengthened into abhorrence by the exasperations 
of war, and all whose affections are fixed upon its enemy ! But, 
at all events, you are to keep the Canadas. What, then, will you 
do about sailors' rights ? You will not be a jot nearer to them 
then, than you are now — how will you procure them, or seek to 
procure them? Will you then begin in good earnest to protect or 
obtain them by naval means ? Would it not be advisable to attend 
to this declared object of the war now, rather than wait until after 
the Canadian scheme is effected ? 

Perhaps you mean to keep Canada and abandon sailors' rights. 
If so, why not avow to the people that it is conquest you fight 
for, and not right ? But perhaps it is designed, when the conquest 
is effected, to give it back to Britain as an equivalent for the cessa- 
tion, on her part, of some maritime right — for the privilege that 
our ships shall not be searched for British sailors. On this ques- 
tion you may make an arrangement practically securing all we 
ought now to contend for. You will, I hope, make it in the 
pending negotiation. But that by a surrender of Canada after it 
is conquered you may purchase from her a disavowal or relin- 
quishment of the right, no man can believe who understands either 
the views or the prejudices of that people. They believe the 
right essential to their naval existence, to deter their seamen from 
general desertion. All classes in that country so regard it — we 
know there is not a difference of opinion among any description of 
politicians in the kingdom upon this subject. If they have any 
jealousy of you (and I believe some of them have), it is not a 
iealousy of your territorial extent, but of your fitness to become 
their commercial and naval rival. Can it be believed, then, that 
they would compromise in a surrender of a claim, which, surren- 
dered, in their judgment, weakens them, and invigorates you where 
alone they are apprehensive of a competition, for the sake of pre • 
venting an accession to your territory which extends your limits, 
while it takes away from your strength ? Indulge no such delu- 
sion ; were Canada a thousand times more important to Britain 
than it is, it were yet of less value than her naval power. For the 



296 



MR. GASTON'S SPEECH 



sake of it she would never yield a principle on which that nava, 
power depends. No, sir, the return of conquered Canada, even 
with the hoped-for agency in your favor of the Russian emperor, 
would not weigh a feather in the scale against what she deems her 
first great national interest. 

As it regards, too, these fancied exertions of Russia in our favor, 
gentlemen surely deceive themselves. However attached Russia 
may be to the most liberal principles of commercial intercourse, 
she never will array herself against the right of the sovereign to 
compel the services of his seafaring subjects. On this head her 
policy is not less rigorous (to say the least), than that of England. 
I will not be more particular. A short time will probably show 
the grounds of my belief. 

But, sir, among the reasons for prosecuting the invasion of 
Canada, one has been gravely stated of a very peculiar kind. 
Canada, says a gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Calhoun), 
should be invaded to protect our frontiers and seaboard from inva- 
sion — it is the most economical and effectual method of defence. 
Although this consideration presents nothing very splendid to our 
view, yet it would be worth all other reasons for the invasion if it 
were founded on fact. But ask the people on your frontiers and 
on your seaboard, and what will they say? They will tell you, 
that it is the invasion of Canada alone which endangers them. 
The most effectual defence to them would be an abandonment of 
your scheme. Sir, an invasion of the United States, but for the 
purpose of diverting your forces from Canada or retorting on you 
the distresses of war, cannot enter into the scheme of British or 
Canadian policy. It is not to be prosecuted, but at vast inconve- 
nience and expense, with great loss of useful soldiers, under a cer- 
tainty of ultimate failure, and without hope of glory or gain. The 
Canadian yeomanry, freed from the terms of invasion, will cheer- 
fully resume their peaceful occupations ; and such of the British 
regulars as are not required for ordinary garrison duty, instead of 
being employed in a miserable, predatory, yet destructive border 
warfare, will be sent to mingle in the European strife where re- 
nown and empire are the mighty stake. 

Surely this is emphatically the age and the government of 
paradox. A war for " free trade " is waged by embargo and 
prohibition of all commercial intercourse ; " sailors' rights " are 
secured by imprisoning them at home, and not permitting them 
to move from place to place within their prison but by a license 
from a collector like a negro's pass, and obtained on the security 
of a bondsman : and our frontiers and seaboard are to be defended 
by an invasion of Canada, which can alone endanger an attack ! 

But the real efficient argument for perseverance in the scheme 
of Canadian conquest has been given by the gentleman from 



ON THE LOAN BILL. 



297 



Tennessee (Mr. Grundy.) We made the war on Britain, says the 
gentleman, and shall we restrict ourselves to defensive measures ? 
For what purpose was war declared if we do nothing against the 
possessions of the enemy ? Yes, sir, it is the consideration that 
this war was originally offensive on our side, that creates the, I ' 
fear, insuperable obstacle to our discontinuance of it. 

It were vain to lament that gentlemen are under the influence 
of feelings which belong to human nature. It would be idleness to 
declaim against the sinfulness or the folly of false pride. All must 
admit that it is one of the greatest efforts of magnanimity to retrace 
a course publicly taken, and in the correctness of which reputation 
is staked. If honorable gentlemen could but perceive that this 
difficulty is one of pride only, and of pride opposing their country's 
best interests, I know that they could, and believe many of them 
would, make the effort. Painful as may be the acknowledgment 
of political error, yet, if they clearly saw that either this humiliation 
must be endured, or the nation ruined, they could not hesitate in 
their choice between such alternatives. But, sir, I wish not to pre- 
sent such alternatives to their election — so difficult is it to produce 
a conviction against which the pride of the heart rebels, that I will 
not attempt it. Gentlemen are not called on to retract. They 
may now suspend the execution of their scheme of invasion with- 
out an acknowledgment of its error. They may now, without 
humiliation, restrict themselves to defence, although the war was, 
in its origin, offensive. A second favorable opportunity is presented 
of restoring tranquillity to our once happy country. The first, the 
revocation of the orders in council, was suffered to pass unimproved. 
Let not this be lost ; a third may not shortly occur. Your enemy 
has invited a direct negotiation for the restoration of peace. 
Your executive has accepted the offer, and ministers have been 
appointed to meet the commissioners of the opposite party. This 
circumstance ought to produce an entire and essential change in 
vour policy. If the executive be sincere in the acceptance of this 
proposition, he must have acted on the hope that an amicable ad- 
iustment of differences might be made. And while there is such a 
hope, such a prospect, on what principle can you justify invasion 
and conquest ? Force is the substitute, not the legitimate coadjutor 
of negotiation. Nations fight because they cannot treat. Every 
benevolent feeling and correct principle are opposed to an effusion of 
blood, an extension of misery, which are hoped to be unnecessary. 
'Tis necessity alone which furnishes their excuse : do not then, at 
the moment when you avow a belief, a hope at least, that such 
necessity exists not, pursue a conduct which, but for its existence, 
is inhuman and detestable. Besides, sir, if you are earnest in the 
wish to obtain peace from the Gottenburg mission, suspend in the 
mean time offensive operations, which cannot facilitate, and raav 

Pp 



298 



MR. GASTON'S SPEECH 



prevent the accomplishment of your object. Think you that Brit- 
ain is to be intimidated by your menaced invasion of her territories ? 
If she had not learned by experience, how harmless are your 
^threats, she would nevertheless see but little cause for fear. She 
knows that the conquest cannot be completed in one, nor in two 
campaigns. And when she finds that every soldier whom you en- 
list, is to cost you, in bounty alone, upwards of one hundred guin- 
eas, she will perceive that the war is more destructive to your 
finances, the great source of military strength, than to her territo- 
ries. The blow aimed at her, recoils upon yourselves. But the 
exasperations which must result from the wrongs mutually inflicted 
in the course of the campaign, may have a very injurious effect upon 
the disposition to pursue pacific efforts. They will be apt to 
create a temper on each side, unfavorable to an amicable arrange- 
ment. 

In truth too, sir, you are not prepared for such a campaign, as 
in honor and humanity you can alone permit yourselves to carry 
on. Suppose by the month of May or June, you raise your men. 
What are they ? Soldiers, fitted to take care of themselves in 
camp, and support the reputation of your armies in the field ? No ; 
they are a mere rabble of war recruits : march them to Canada, and 
pestilence will sweep them off by regiments and brigades, while 
the want of discipline will unfit those whom pestilence spares, for 
an honorable contest with an experienced foe. Instead, therefore, 
of the hurry and bustle of filling your ranks with recruits, and rush- 
ing with them into Canada, attend rather to the training and im- 
provement of those now in the service. Make soldiers of them ; by 
gradual enlistments you may regularly add to their number, and 
insensibly incorporate the new levies with the disciplined troops. 
If it should hereafter become necessary to march into the field, you 
will then have an army under your command, not a multitude 
without subordination. Suspend, therefore, hostilities while you 
negotiate. Make an armistice until the result of the negotiation 
is ascertained. You can lose nothing; you can gain ev^ry thing 
by such a course ; then negotiate fairly, with a view to obtain for 
our native seamen a practicable and reasonable security against im- 
pressment, and with a disposition to aid Britain in commanding 
the services of her own. Such an arrangement might have been 
made on the revocation of the orders in council, could you have 
been then satisfied with any thing short of an abandonment of the 
British claim to search. I doubt not but that it may now be made ; 
more you cannot probably obtain. The time may come, when, 
with greater effect, you can prefer, if necessary, higher claims. 
All is hazarded by precipitately urging more than your relative 
strength enables you to enforce. Permit your country to grow ; 
let no just right be abandoned ; if any be postponed, it may be 



ON THE LOAN BILL. 



299 



advanced at a more opportune season, with better prospect of 
success. If you will quit this crusade against Canada, and seek 
peace in the spirit of accommodation ; and (permit me to add) if 
you will forego your empiric schemes of embargo and commercial 
restrictions, you will restore harmony at home, and allay that wide- 
spread, and, in some places, alarming spirit of discontent that pre- 
vails in our land. And if your pacific efforts fail, if an obstinate and 
implacable foe will not agree to such a peace as the country can with 
credit accept, then appeal to the candor and spirit of your people, 
for a constitutional support, with a full assurance that such an 
appeal, under such circumstances, cannot be made in vain. 

It is time, Mr. Chairman, that I should release you from the 
fatigue of hearing me. There is but one more topic to which I so- 
licit your attention. Many admonitions have been addressed to 
the minority, by gentlemen on the ministerial side of the house, 
not without merit, and I hope not without edification, on the evils 
of violent opposition and intemperate party spirit. It is not to be 
denied, that opposition may exceed all reasonable bounds, and a 
minority become factious. But when I hear it seriously urged, 
that the nature of our government forbids that firm, manly, active 
opposition, which, in countries less free, is salutary and necessary; 
and when I perceive all the dangers of faction, apprehended only 
on the side of a minority, I witness but new instances of that won- 
derful ductility of the human mind, which, in its zeal to effect a 
favorite purpose, begins with the work of self-deception. 

Why, sir, will not our form of government tolerate or require 
the same ardor of constitutional opposition, which is desirable in 
one wherein the chief magistrate is hereditary? "Because," says 
the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Calhoun), " in a mon- 
archy, the influence of the executive and his ministers requires 
continual vigilance, lest it obtain too great a preponderance ; but 
here the executive springs from the people, can do nothing with- 
out their support, and cannot therefore overrule and control the 
public sentiment." Sir, let us not stop at the surface of things ; 
the influence of the executive in this country, while he retains his 
popularity, is infinitely greater than that of a limited monarch. It 
is as much stronger, as the spasm of convulsion is more violent 
than the voluntary tension of a muscle. The warmth of feeling 
excited during the contest of an election, and the natural zeal to 
uphold him whom they have chosen, create, between the exec- 
utive and his adherents, a connection of passion, while the dis- 
tribution of office and emolument adds a communion of interest, 
which, combined, produce a union almost indissoluble. ( Support 
the administration/ becomes a watchword, which passes from each 
chieftain of the dominant party to his subalterns, and thence to 
their followers in the ranks, till the president's opinion becomes 



300 



MR. GASTON'S SPEECH 



the criterion of orthodoxy, and his notions obtain a dominion over 
the public sentiment, which facilitates the most dangerous encroach- 
ments, and demands the most jealous supervision. In proportion 
as a government is free, the spirit of bold inquhy, of animated in- 
terest in its measures, and of firm opposition where they are not 
approved, becomes essential to its purity and continuance. And 
he, who, in a democracy, or republic, attempts to control the will 
of the popular idol of the day, may envy the luxurious ease with 
which ministerial oppressions are opposed and thwarted in govern- 
ments which are less free. 

Intemperance of party, wherever found, never will meet with an 
advocate in me. It is a most calamitous scourge to our country — 
the bane of social enjoyment, of individual justice, and of public 
virtue — unfriendly to the best pursuits of man, his interest and his 
duty ; it renders useless or even pernicious the highest endowments 
of intellect, and the noblest disposition of the soul. But, sir, 
whatever may be the evil necessarily inherent in its nature, its rav- 
ages are the most enormous and desolating when it is seated on 
the throne of power, and vested with all the attributes of rule. 

I mean not to follow the gentleman from South Carolina over 
the classic ground of Greece, Carthage and Rome, to refute his 
theory, and show, that not to vehement opposition, but to the abuse 
of factious and intolerant power, their doom is to be attributed. 
Nor will I examine some more modern instances of republics whose 
destruction has the same origin. The thing is no longer matter of 
discussion ; it has passed into a settled truth in the science of po- 
litical philosophy. One, who, on a question of historical deduction, 
of political theory, is entitled to high respect, has given us an admi- 
rable summary of the experience of republics on this interesting 
inquiry. In the tenth number of the Federalist, written by Mr. 
Madison, we find the following apt and judicious observations : — 
" By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amount- 
ing to a majority or minority of the whole, who are united and ac- 
tuated by some common impulse of passion or of interest, adverse 
to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate 
interests of the community. The inference to which we are brought 
is, that the causes of faction cannot be removed ; and that relief is 
only to be sought in the means of controlling its effects. If a fac- 
tion consists of less than a majority, relief is supplied by the re- 
publican principle, which enables the majority to defeat its sinister 
views by regular vote. It may clog the administration, it may con- 
vulse the society ; but it will be unable to execute and mask its vi- 
olence under the forms of the constitution. When a majority is 
deluded in a faction, the form of popular government, on the oth- 
er hand, enables it to sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest, both 
the public good and the rights of other citizens. To secure th«* 



ON THE LOAN BILL. 



public good and private rights against the dangers of such a faction, 
and, at the same time, to preserve the spirit and the form of popu- 
lar government, is then jhe great object to which our inquiries are 
directed. Let me add, that it is the great desideratum by which 
alone this form of government can be rescued from the opprobrium 
under which it has so long labored, and be recommended to the 
esteem and adoption of mankind." 

If this doctrine were, then, to be collected from the history of 
the world, can it now be doubted, since the experience of the last 
twenty-five years ? Go to France, once revolutionary, now im- 
perial France, and ask her whether factious power, or intemperate 
opposition, be the more fatal to freedom and happiness ? Perhaps, 
at some moment when the eagle eye of her master is turned away, 
she may whisper to you, to behold the demolition of Lyons or the 
devastation of La Vendee. Perhaps she will give you a written 
answer — Draw near to the once fatal lamp-post, and by its flicker- 
ing light, read it as traced in characters of blood that flowed from 
the guillotine — " Faction is a demon ! faction out of power is a de- 
mond enchained ! faction vested with the attributes of rule is a 
Moloch of destruction ! " 

' Sir, if the denunciations which gentlemen have pronounced 
against factious violence, are not merely the image of rhetorical 
pomp, if they are, indeed, solicitous to mitigate the rancor of party 
feuds, in the sincerity of my soul, I wish them success. 

It is melancholy to behold the miserable jealousies and malignant 
suspicions which so extensively prevail, to the destruction of social 
comfort, and the eminent peril of the republic. On this subject 
I have reflected much ; not merely in the intervals stolen from the 
bustle of business or the gayeties of amusement ; but in the mo- 
ments of" depression and solitude," the most favorable to the cor- 
rection of error. For one, I am willing to bring a portion of party 
feeling and party prejudice, as an oblation at the shrine of my coun- 
try. But no offering can avail any thing, if not made on the part 
of those who are the political favorites of the day. On them it is 
incumbent to come forward and set the magnanimous example. 
Approaches or concessions on the side of the minority would 
be misconstrued into indications of timidity, or of a hankering for 
favor. But a spirit of conciliation arising from those ranks would 
be hailed as the harbinger of sunny days, as a challenge to liberality, 
and to a generous contention for the public weal. This spirit re- 
quires not any departure from deliberate opinion, unless it is shown 
to be erroneous. Such a concession would be a dereliction of duty. 
Its injunctions would be few, and, it is to be hoped, not difficult of 
observance. Seek to uphold your measures by the force of argu 
ment, not of denunciation ; stigmatize not opposition to your notions 
with offensive epithets. These prove nothing but your anger or your 
26 



302 MR. GASTON'S SPEECH ON THE LOAN BILL. 



weakness, and are sure to generate a spirit of " moral resistance," 
not easily to be checked or tamed. Give to presidential views 
constitutional respect, but suffer them not to supersede the exercise 
of independent inquiry. Encourage instead of suppressing fair 
discussion, so that those, who approve not, may at least have 
a respectful hearing. Thus, without derogating a particle from 
the energy of your measures, you will impart a tone to political 
dissensions which would deprive them of their acrimony, and 
render them harmless to the nation. 

The nominal party distinctions, sir, have become mere cabalis- 
tic terms. It is no longer a question whether, according to the 
theory of our constitution, there is more danger of the federal en 
croaching on the state governments, or the democracy of the 
state governments paralyzing the arm of federal power. Federalism 
and democracy have lost their meaning. It is now a question of 
commerce, peace and union of the states. On this question, unless 
the honesty and intelligence of the nation shall confederate into 
one great American party, disdaining petty office-keeping and 
office-hunting views, defying alike the insolence of the popular 
prints, the prejudices of faction, and the dominion of executive 
influence — I fear a decision will be pronounced fatal to the hopes, 
to the existence of the nation. In this question, I assuredly have 
a very deep interest ; but it is the interest of a citizen only. My 
public career, I hope, will not continue long. Should it please the 
Disposer of events to permit me to see the great interests of this 
nation confided to men who will secure its rights by firmness, 
moderation and impartiality abroad, and at home cultivate the arts 
of peace, encourage honest industry in all its branches, dispense 
equal justice to all classes of the community, and thus administer 
the government in the true spirit of the constitution, as a trust for 
the people, not as the property of a party, it will be to me utterly 
unimportant by what political epithet they may be characterized. 
As a private citizen, grateful for the blessings I may enjoy, and 
yielding a prompt obedience to every legitimate demand that can 
be made upon me, I shall rejoice, as far as my little sphere may 
extend, to foster the same dispositions among those who sur- 
round me. 



303 



SPEECH OF WILLIAM PINKNEl, 

ON THE 

TREATY-MAKING POWER, 

DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE 
UNITED STATES, JANUARY 10, 1816. 



A convention between the United States and Great Britain was signed at 
London, in July, 1815, and subsequently ratified by the president and 
senate, by which it was stipulated that the discriminating- duties on Brit- 
ish vessels and their cargoes, then subsisting under certain acts of con- 
gress, should be abolished, in return for a reciprocal stipulation on the 
part of Great Britain. On this occasion, a bill was brought into the 
house of representatives to carry the convention into effect, specifically 
enacting the stipulations contained in the convention itself. This bill 
was opposed by Mr. Pinkney in the following speech : — 

Mr. Chairman, 
I intended yesterday, if the state of my health had permit- 
ted, to have trespassed on the house with a short sketch of the 
grounds upon which I disapprove of the bill. What I could not do 
then, I am about to endeavor now, under the pressure, neverthe- 
less, of continuing indisposition, as well as under the influence of 
a natural reluctance thus to manifest an apparently ambitious and 
improvident hurry to lay aside the character of a listener to the 
wisdom of others, by which I could not fail to profit, for that of an 
expounder of my own humble notions, which are not likely to be 
profitable to any body. It is, indeed, but too probable that I 
should best have consulted both delicacy and discretion, if I had 
forborne this precipitate attempt to launch my little bark upon 
what an honorable member has aptly termed the " torrent of de- 
bate " which this bill has produced. I am conscious that it may, 
with singular propriety, be said of me, that I am novus hospes here ; 
that 1 ha ve scarcely begun to acquire a domicil among those whom 
I am undertaking to address ; and that, recently transplanted hith- 
er from courts of judicature, I ought, for a season, to look upon 
myself as a sort of exotic, which time has not sufficiently familiar- 
ized with the soil to which it has been removed, to enaole it to 



304 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



put forth either fruit or flower. However all this may be, it is 
now too late to be silent. I proceed, therefore, to entreat your 
indulgent attention to the few words with which I have to trouble 
you upon the subject under deliberation. 

That subject has already been treated with an admirable force 
and perspicuity on all sides of the house. The strong power of 
argument has drawn aside, as it ought to do, the veil which is sup- 
posed to belong to it, and which some of us seem unwilling to dis- 
turb ; and the stronger power of genius, from a higher region than 
that of argument, has thrown upon it all the light with which it is 
the prerogative of genius to invest and illustrate every thing. It 
js fit that it should be so ; for the subject is worthy by its dignity 
and importance to employ in the discussion of it all the powers of 
the mind, and all the eloquence by which I have already felt that 
this assembly is distinguished. The subject is the fundamental 
law. We owe it to the people to labor with sincerity and diligence, 
to ascertain the true construction of that law, which is but a record 
of their will. We owe it to the obligations of the oath which has 
recently been imprinted upon our consciences, as well as to the 
people, to be obedient to that will when we have succeeded in 
ascertaining it. I shall give you my opinion upon this matter, 
with the utmost deference for the judgment of others, but, at the 
same time, with that honest and unreserved freedom which becomes 
this place, and is suited to my habits. 

Before we can be in a situation to decide whether this bill 
ought to pass, we must know precisely what it is ; what it is not, 
is obvious. It is not a bill which is auxiliary to the treaty. It 
does not deal with details which the treaty does not bear in its own 
bosom. It contains no subsidiary enactments, no dependent pro- 
visions, flowing as corollaries from the treaty. It is not to raise 
money or to make appropriations, or to do any thing else beyond 
or out of the treaty. It acts simply as the echo uf the treaty. 

Ingeminat voces, auditaque verba reportat. It may properly be 
called the twin-brother of the treaty ; its duplicate, its reflected 
image, for it reenacts with a timid fidelity, somewhat inconsistent 
with the boldness of its pretensions, all that the treaty stipulates, 
and having performed that work of supererogation, stops. It 
once attempted something more, indeed; but that surplus has been 
expunged from it as a desperate intruder, as something which 
might violate, by a misinterpretation of the treaty, that very public 
faith which we are now prepared to say the treaty has never 
ulighted in any the smallest degree. In one word, the bill is a 
fac simile of the treaty in all its clauses. 

I am warranted in concluding, then, that, if it be any thing but 
an empty form of words, it is a confirmation or ratification of the 
treaty; or, to speak with a m~,re guarded accuracy, is an act to 



THE TREATY-MAKING POWER. 



305 



which only (if passed into a law), the treaty can owe its being. 
If it does not spring from the jpruritas leges ferendi, by which this 
body can never be afflicted, I am warranted in saying, that it 
springs from a hypothesis (which may afflict us with a worse dis- 
ease), that no treaty of commerce can be made by any power in 
the state but congress. It stands upon that postulate, or it is a 
mere bubble, which might be suffered to float through the forms of 
legislation, and then to burst without consequence or notice. 

That this postulate is utterly irreconcilable with the claims and 
port with which this convention comes before you, it is impossible 
to deny. Look at it ! Has it the air or shape of a mere pledge 
that the president will recommend to congress the passage of such 
laws as will produce the effect at which it aims ? Does it profess 
to be preliminary, or provisional, or inchoate, or to rely upon your 
instrumentality in the consummation of it, or to take any notice of 
you, however distant, as actual or eventual parties to it? No, it 
pretends upon the face of it, and in the solemnities with which it 
has been accompanied and followed, to be a pact with a foreign 
state, complete and self-efficient, from the obligation of which this 
government cannot now escape, and to the perfection of which no 
more is necessary than has already been done. It contains the 
clause which is found in the treaty of 1794, and substantially in 
every other treaty made by the United States under the present 
constitution, so as to become a formula, that, when ratified by the 
president of the United States, by and with the advice and 
consent of the senate, and by his Britannic majesty, and the re- 
spective ratifications mutually exchanged, it shall be binding and 
obligatory on the said states and his majesty. 

It has been ratified in conformity with that clause. Its ratifica- 
tions have been exchanged in the established and stipulated mode. 
It has been proclaimed, as other treaties have been proclaimed, by 
the executive government, as an integral portion of the law of the 
land, and our citizens, at home and abroad, have been admonished 
to keep and observe it accordingly. It has been sent to the other 
contracting party with the last stamp of the national faith upon it, 
after the manner of former treaties with the same power, and will 
have been received and acted upon by that party as a concluded 
contract, long before your loitering legislation can overtake it. I 
protest, sir, I am somewhat at a loss to understand what this con- 
vention has been, since its ratifications were exchanged, and what 
it is now, if our bill be sound in its principle. Has it not been, 
and is it not an unintelligible, unbaptized and unbaptizable thing, 
without attributes of any kind, bearing the semblance of an exe- 
cuted compact, but in reality a hollow fiction ; a thing which no 
man is led to consider even as the germ of a treaty, entitled to be 
cherished in the vineyard of the constitution ; a thing which, pro- 
26* Qq 



306 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



fessing to have done every thing that public honor demands, has 
done nothing but practise delusion ? You may ransack every dip- 
lomatic nomenclature, and run through every vocabulary, wheth- 
er of diplomacy or law, and you shall not find a word by which 
you may distinguish, if our bill be correct in its hypothesis, this 
" deed without a name." A plain man, who is not used to manage 
his phrases, may, therefore, presume to say, that if this convention 
with England be not a valid treaty, which does not stand in need 
of your assistance, it is a usurpation on the part of those who have 
undertaken to make it ; that, if it be not an act within the treaty- 
making capacity, confided to the president and senate, it is an en- 
croachment on the legislative rights of congress. 

o o o 

I am one of those who view the bill upon the table as declar- 
ing that it is not within that capacity, as looking down upon the 
convention as the still-born progeny of arrogated power, as offer- 
ing to it the paternity of congress, and affecting by that paternity 
to give to it life and strength ; and as I think that the convention 
does not stand in need of any such filiation , to make it either strong 
or legitimate, that it is already all that it can become, and that 
useless legislation . upon such a subject is vicious legislation, I shall 
vote against the bill. The correctness of these opinions is what I 
propose to establish. 

I lay it down as an incontrovertible truth, that the constitution 
has assumed (and, indeed, how could it do otherwise ?) that the 
government of the United States might and would have occasion, 
like the other governments of the civilized world, to enter into 
treaties with foreign powers, upon the various subjects involved in 
their mutual relations ; and, further, that it might be, and was 
proper to designate the department of the government in which 
the capacity to make such treaties should be lodged. It has said, 
accordingly, that the president, with the concurrence of the senate, 
shall possess this portion of the national sovereignty. It has, fur- 
thermore, given to the same magistrate, with the same concurrence, 
the exclusive creation and control of the whole machinery of dip- 
lomacy. He only, with the approbation of the senate, can ap- 
point a negotiator, or take any step towards negotiation. The 
constitution does not, in any part of it, even intimate that any 
other department shall possess either a constant or an occasional 
right to interpose in the preparation of any treaty, or in the final 
perfection of it. The president and senate are explicitly pointed 
out as the sole actors in that sort of transaction. The prescribed 
concurrence of the senate, and that too by a majority greater than 
tne ordinary legislative majority, plainly excludes the necessity of 
congressional concurrence. If the consent of congress to any 
treaty had been intended, the constitution would not have been 
guilty of the absurdity of first putting a treaty for ratification to 



THE TREATY-MAKING POWER. 



307 



the president and senate exclusively, and again to the same presi- 
dent and senate as portions of the legislature. It would have sub- 
mitted the whole matter at once to congress, and the more espe- 
cially, as the ratification of a treaty by the senate, as a branch of the 
legislature, may be by a smaller number than a ratification of it 
by the same body, as a branch of the executive government. If 
the ratification of any treaty by the president, with the advice and 
consent of the senate, must be followed by a legislative ratification, 
it is a mere nonentity. It is good for all purposes, or for none. 
And if it be nothing in effect, it is a mockery by which nobody 
would be bound. The president and senate would not themselves 
be bound by it ; and the ratification would at last depend, not up- 
on the will of the president and two thirds of the senate, but upon 
the will of a bare majority of the two branches of the legislature, 
subject to the qualified legislative control of the president. 

Upon the power of the president and senate, therefore, there 
can be no doubt. The only question is as to the extent of it ; or, 
in other words, as to the subject upon which it may be exerted. 
The effect of the power, when exerted within its lawful sphere, is 
beyond the reach of controversy. The constitution has declared, 
that whatsoever amounts to a treaty, made under the authority of 
the United States, shall immediately be supreme law. It has con- 
tradistinguished a treatv as law from an act of congress as law. 
It has erected treaties, so contradistinguished, into a binding judi- 
cial rule. It has given them to our courts of justice, in defining 
their jurisdiction, as a portion of the lex terra, which they are to 
interpret and enforce. In a word, it has communicated to them, 
if ratified by the department which it has specially provided for 
the making of them, the rank of law, or it has spoken without 
meaning. And if it has elevated them to that rank, it is idle to 
attempt to raise them to it by ordinary legislation. 

Upon the extent of the power, or the subjects upon which it 
may act, there is as little room for controversy. The power is to 
make treaties. The word treaties is nomen generalissiinum, and 
will comprehend commercial treaties, unless there be a limit upon 
it, by which they are excluded. It is the appellative, which will 
take in the whole species, if there be nothing to narrow its scope. 
There is no such limit. There is not a syllable in the context of 
the clause to restrict the natural import of its phraseology. The 
power is left to the force of the generic term, and is, therefore, as 
wide as a treaty-making power can be. It embraces all the varie- 
ties of treaties which it could be supposed this government could 
find it necessary or proper to make, or it embraces none. It cov- 
ers the whole treaty-making ground which this government could 
be expected to occupy, or not an inch of it. 

It is a just presumption, that it was designed to be coextensive 



308 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



with all the exigencies of our affairs. Usage sanctions that pre- 
sumption ; expediency does the same. The omission of any ex- 
ception to the power, the omission of the designation of a mode 
by which a treaty, not intended to be included within it, might 
otherwise be made, confirms it. That a commercial treaty was, 
above all others, in the contemplation of the constitution, is mani- 
fest. The immemorial practice of Europe, and particularly of the 
nation from which we emigrated, the consonance of enlightened 
theory to that practice, prove it. It may be said, indeed, that at 
the epoch of the birth of our constitution, the necessity for a power 
to make commercial treaties was scarcely visible, for that our trade 
was then in its infancy. It was so ; but it was the infancy of an 
other Hercules, promising, not indeed a victory over the lion of 
Nemaea, or the boar of Erymanthus, but the peaceful conquest of 
every sea which could be subjected to the dominion of commer- 
cial enterprise. It was then as apparent as it is now, that the 
destinies of this great nation were irrevocably commercial ; that 
the ocean would be whitened by our sails, and the ultima Thule 
of the world compelled to witness the more than Phoenician spirit 
and intelligence of our merchants. With this glorious anticipation 
daw T ning upon them — with this resplendent Aurora gilding the 
prospect of the future — nay, with the risen orb of trade illumina- 
ting the vast horizon of American greatness — it cannot be supposed 
that the framers of the constitution did not look to the time when 
we should be called upon to make commercial conventions. It 
needs not the aid of the imagination to reject this disparaging and 
monstrous supposition. Dulness itself, throwing aside the lethar- 
gy of its character, and rising for a passing moment to the rapture 
of enthusiasm, will disclaim it with indignation. 

It is said, however, that the constitution has given to congress 
the powder to regulate commerce with foreign nations ; and that, 
since it would be inconsistent with that power, that the president, 
with the consent of the senate, should do the same thing, it fol- 
lows, that this power of congress is an exception out of the treaty- 
making power. Never were premises, as it appears to my under- 
standing, less suited to the conclusion. The power of congress to 
regulate our foreign trade, is a power of municipal legislation, and 
w T as designed to operate as far as, upon such a subject, municipal 
legislation can reach. Without such a power, the government 
would be wholly inadequate to the ends for which it was instituted. 
A power to regulate commerce by treaty alone, would touch only 
a portion of the subject. A wider and more general power was 
therefore indispensable, and it was properly devolved on con- 
gress, as the legislature of the Union. 

On the other hand, a power of mere municipal legislation, act- 
ing upon view T s exclusively our own, having no reference to a 



THE TREATY-MAKING POWER. 



309 



reciprocation of advantages by arrangements with a foreign state, 
would also fall short of the ends of government in a country of 
which the commercial relations are complex and extensive, and 
liable to be embarrassed by conflicts between its own interests and 
those of other nations. That the power of congress is simply le- 
gislative in the strictest sense, and calculated for ordinary domestic 
regulation only, is plain from the language in which it is communi- 
cated. There is nothing in that language which indicates regula- 
tion by compact or compromise, nothing which points to the coop- 
eration of a foreign power, nothing which designates a treaty -mak- 
ing faculty. It is not connected with any of the necessary accom- 
paniments of that faculty ; it is not furnished with any of those 
means, without which it is impossible to make the smallest prog- 
ress towards a treaty. 

It is self-evident, that a capacity to regulate commerce by trea- 
ty, was intended by the constitution to be lodged somewhere. It 
is just as evident, that the legislative capacity of congress does not 
amount to it, and cannot be exerted to produce a treaty. It can 
produce only a statute, with which a foreign state cannot be made 
to concur, and which will not yield to any modifications which a 
foreign state may desire to impress upon it for suitable equivalents. 
There is no way in which congress, as such, can mould its laws 
into treaties, if it respects the constitution. It may legislate and 
counter-legislate ; but it must forever be beyond its capacity to 
combine in a law, emanating from its separate domestic authority, 
its own views with those of other governments, and to produce a 
harmonious reconciliation of those jarring purposes and discordant 
elements which it is the business of negotiation to adjust. 

I reason thus, then, upon this part of the subject. It is clear 
that the power of congress, as to foreign commerce, is only what 
it professes to be in the constitution — a legislative power, to be ex- 
erted municipally without consultation or agreement with those 
with whom we have an intercourse of trade ; it is undeniable that 
the constitution meant to provide for the exercise of another rela- 
tively to commerce, which should exert itself in concert with the 
analogous power in other countries, and should bring about its re- 
sults, not by statute enacted by itself, but by an international com- 
pact called a treaty ; that it is manifest, that this other power is 
vested by the constitution in the president and senate, the only de- 
partment of the government which it authorizes to make any trea- 
ty, and which it enables to make all treaties ; that if it be so vest- 
ed, its regular exercise must result in that which, as far as it 
reaches, is law in itself, and consequently repeals such municipal 
regulations as stand in its way, since it is expressly declared by 
the constitution that treaties, regularly made, shall have, as they 
ought to have, the force of law. In all this, I perceive nothing to 



310 



MR. PINKN E Y'S SPEECH ON 



perplex or alarm us. It exhibits a well-digested and uniform plan 
of government, worthy of the excellent men by whom it was 
formed. The ordinary power to regulate commerce by statutory 
enactments, could only be devolved upon congress, possessing all 
the other legislative powers of the government. The extraordi- 
nary power to regulate it by treaty, could not be devolved upon 
congress, because from its composition, and the absence of all 
those authorities and functions which are essential to the activity 
and effect of a treaty-making power, it was not calculated to be 
the depositary of it. It was wise and consistent to place the ex- 
traordinary power to regulate commerce by treaty, where the res- 
idue of the treaty-making power was placed, where only the 
means of negotiation could be found, and the skilful and beneficial 
use of them could reasonably be expected. 

That congress legislates upon commerce, subject to the treaty- 
making power, is a position perfectly intelligible ; but the under- 
standing is in some degree confounded by the other proposition, 
that the legislative power of congress is an exception out of the 
treaty-making power. It introduces into the constitution a strange 
anomaly — a commercial state, with a written constitution, and no 
power in it to regulate its trade, in conjunction with other states, 
in the universal mode, of convention. It will be in vain to urge, 
that this anomaly is merely imaginary ; for that the president and 
senate may make a treaty of commerce for the consideration of 
congress. The answer is, that the treaties which the president 
and senate are entitled to make, are such as, when made, become 
law ; that it is no part of their functions simply to initiate treaties, 
but conclusively to make them ; and that where they have no 
power to make them, there is no provision in the constitution how 
or by whom they shall be made. 

That there is nothing new in the idea of a separation of the legis- 
lative and conventional powers upon commercial subjects, and of 
the necessary control of the former by the latter, is known to all 
who are acquainted with the constitution of England. The par- 
liament of that country enacts the statutes by which its trade is 
regulated municipally. The crown modifies them by a treaty. It 
has been imagined, indeed, that the parliament is in the practice of 
confirming such treaties ; but the fact is undoubtedly otherwise. 
Commercial treaties are laid before parliament, because the king's 
ministers are responsible for their advice in the making of them, 
and because the vast range and complication of the English laws 
of trade and revenue render legislation unavoidable, not for the 
ratification, but the execution, of their commercial treaties. 

it is suggested, again, that the treaty-making power (unless we 
are tenants in common of it with the president and senate, to the 
extent at least of our legislative rights) is a pestilent monster 



THE TREATY-MAKING POWER. 



311 



pregnant with all sorts of disasters ! It teems with " Gorgons and 
Hydras and Chimeras dire ! " At any rate, 1 may take for grant- 
ed, that the case before us does not justify this array of metaphor 
and fable ; since we are all agreed that the convention with Ens;- 
land is not only harmless but salutary. To put this particular 
case, however, out of the argument, what have we to do with 
considerations like these? Are we here to form, or to submit to 
the constitution as it has been given to us for a rule by those who 
are our masters ? Can we take upon ourselves the office of po- 
litical casuists, and because we think that a power ought to be less 
than it is, compel it to shrink to our standard ? Are we to bow 
with reverence before the national will as the constitution displays 
it, or to fashion it to our own, to quarrel with that charter, with- 
out which we ourselves are nothing ; or to take it as a guide 
which we cannot desert with innocence or safety ? But why is 
the treaty-making power, lodged, as I contend it is, in the presi- 
dent and senate, likely to disaster us, as we are required to appre- 
hend it will ? Sufficient checks have not, as it seems, been pro- 
vided, either by the constitution or the nature of things, to prevent 
the abuse of it. It is in the house of representatives alone, that 
the amulet, which bids defiance to the approaches of political dis- 
ease, or cures it when it has commenced, can in all vicissitudes be 
found. I hold that the checks are sufficient, without the charm 
of our legislative agency, for all those occasions which wisdom is 
bound to foresee and to guard against ; and that as to the rest 
(the eccentricities and portents which no ordinary checks can deal 
with), the occasions must provide for themselves. 

It is natural, here, to ask of gentlemen, what security they 
would have. They cannot "take a bond of fate;" and they 
have every pledge which is short of it. Have they not, as re- 
spects the president, all the security upon which they rely from 
day to day for the discreet and upright discharge of the whole of 
his other duties, many and various as they are ? What security 
have they that he will not appoint to office the refuse of the w r orld ; 
that he will not pollute the sanctuary of justice by calling vaga- 
bonds to its holy ministry, instead of adorning it with men like 
those who now give to the bench more dignity than they receive 
from it ; that he will not enter into a treaty of amnesty with every 
conspirator against law and order, and pardon culprits from mere 
enmity to virtue? The security for all this, and infinitely more, 
is found in the constitution and in the order of nature ; and we 
are all satisfied with it. One should think that the same security, 
which thus far time has not discredited, might be sufficient to 
tranquillize us upon the score of the power which we are now 
considering. 

We talk of ourselves as if we only were the representatives 



312 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



of the people. But the first magistrate of this country is also the 
representative of the people, the creature of their sovereignty, the 
administrator of their power, their steward and servant, as you are 
— he comes from the people, is lifted by them into place and au- 
thority, and after a short season returns to them for censure or ap- 
plause. There is no analogy between such a magistrate and the 
hereditary monarchs of Europe. He is not bora to the inher- 
itance of office ; he cannot even be elected until he has reached 
an age at which he must pass for what he is ; until his habits 
have been formed, his integrity tried, his capacity ascertained, his 
character discussed and probed, for a series of years, by a press, 
which knows none of the restraints of European policy. He 
acts, as you do, in the full view of his constituents, and under the 
consciousness that on account of the singleness of his station, all 
eyes are upon him. He knows, too, as well as you can know, 
the temper and intelligence of those for whom he acts, and to 
whom he is amenable. He cannot hope that they will be blind 
to the vices of his administration on subjects of high con- 
cernment and vital interest ; and in proportion as he acts upon his 
own responsibility, unrelieved and undiluted by the infusion of 
ours, is the danger of ill-advised conduct likely to be present to 
his mind. 

Of all the powers which have been intrusted to him, there is 
none to which the temptations to abuse belong so little as to the 
treaty-making power in all its branches ; none which can boast 
such mighty safeguards in the feelings and views, and passions 
which even a misanthrope could attribute to the foremost citizen 
of this republic. He can have no motive to palsy, by a commer- 
cial or any other treaty, the prosperity of his country. Setting 
apart the restraints of honor and patriotism, which are characteris- 
tic of public men in a nation habitually free, could he do so with- 
out subjecting himself, as a member of the community (to say 
nothing of his immediate connections), to the evils of his own 
work ? A commercial treaty, too, is always a conspicuous meas- 
ure. It speaks for itself. It cannot take the garb of hypocrisy, 
and shelter itself from the scrutiny of a vigilant and well-instruct- 
ed population. If it be bad, it will be condemned, and if dishon- 
estly made, be execrated. The pride of country, moreover, 
which animates even the lowest of mankind, is here a peculiar 
pledge for the provident and wholesome exercise of power. 
There is not a consideration by which a chord in the human breast 
can be made to vibrate, that is not in this case the ally of duty. 
Every hope, either lofty or humble, that springs forward to the fu- 
ture ; even the vanity which looks not beyond the moment ; the 
dread of shame and the love of glory ; the instinct of ambition ; 
the domestic affections : the cold ponderings of prudence ; and 



THE TREATY-MAKING POWER. 



313 



the ardent instigations of sentiment and passion, are all on the side 
of duty. It is in the exercise of this power that responsibility to 
public opinion, which even despotism feels and truckles to, is of 
gigantic force. If it were possible, as I am sure it is not, that an 
American citizen, raised, upon the credit of a long life of virtue, to 
a station so full of honor, could feel a disposition to mingle the 
little interests of a perverted ambition with the great concerns of 
his country, as embraced by a commercial treaty, and to sacrifice 
her happiness and power by the stipulations of that treaty, to flat- 
ter or aggrandize a foreign state, he would still be saved from the 
perdition of such a course, not only by constitutional checks, but 
by the irresistible efficacy of responsibility to public opinion, in a 
nation whose public opinion wears no mask, and will not be silen- 
ced. He would remember that his political career is but the thing 
of an hour, and that when it has passed he must descend to the 
private station from which he rose, the object either of love and 
veneration, or of scorn and horror. If we cast a glance at England, 
we shall not fail to see the influence of public opinion upon a 
hereditary king, a hereditary nobility, and a house of commons, 
elected, in a great degree, by rotten boroughs, and overflowing 
with placemen. And if this influence is potent there against all 
the efforts of independent power and wide-spread corruption, it 
must in this country be omnipotent. 

But the treaty-making power of the president is further checked 
by the necessity of the concurrence of two thirds of the senate, 
consisting of men selected by the legislatures of the states, them- 
selves elected by the people. They too must have passed through 
the probation of time, before they can be chosen, and must bring 
with them every title to confidence. The duration of their office 
is that of a few years ; their numbers are considerable ; their con- 
stitutional responsibility as great as it can be ; and their moral 
responsibility beyond all calculation. 

The power of impeachment has been mentioned as a check 
upon the president, in the exercise of the treaty-making capacity. 
I rely upon it less than upon others of, as I think, a better class ; 
but as the constitution places some reliance upon it, so do I. It 
has been said, that impeachment has been tried and found want- 
ing. Two impeachments have failed, as I have understood (that 
of a judge was one), — but they may have failed for reasons consis- 
tent with the general efficacy of such a proceeding. I know noth- 
ing of their merits, but I am justified in supposing that the evidence 
was defective, or that the parties were innocent as they were pro- 
nounced to be. Of this, however, I feel assured, that if it should 
ever happen that the president is found to deserve the punishment 
which impeachment seeks to inflict (even for making a treaty to 
which the judges have become parties), and this body should ac 
^ 27 Rr 



314 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



cuse him, in a constitutional way, he will not easily escape. But, 
be that as it may, I ask if it is nothing that you have power to 
arraign him as a culprit. Is it nothing that you can bring him to 
the bar, expose his misconduct to the w T orld, and bring down the 
indignation of the public upon him and those who dare to ac- 
quit him? 

If there be any power explicitly granted by the constitution to 
congress, it is that of declaring war ; and if there be any exercise 
of human legislation more solemn and important than another, it is 
a declaration of war. For expansion it is the largest, for effect 
the most awful, of all the enactments to w r hich congress is compe- 
tent ; and it always is, or ought to be, preceded by grave and 
anxious deliberation. This power, too, is connected with, or 
virtually involves, others of high import and efficacy ; among 
which may be ranked the power of granting letters of marque and 
reprisal, of regulating captures, of prohibiting intercourse with, or 
the acceptance of protections or licenses from the enemy. Yet 
further ; a power to declare war implies, with peculiar emphasis, a 
negative upon all power, in any other branch of the government, 
inconsistent with the full and continuing effect of it. A power to 
make peace in any other branch of the government, is utterly 
inconsistent with that full and continuing effect. It may even 
prevent it from having any effect at all, since peace may follow 
almost immediately (although it rarely does so follow) the com- 
mencement of a war. If, therefore, it be undeniable that the 
president, with the advice and consent of the senate, has power 
to make a treaty of peace, available ipso jure, it is undeniable that 
he has power to repeal, by the mere operation of such a treaty, 
the highest acts of congressional legislation. And it will not be 
questioned, that this repealing power is, from the eminent nature 
of the war-declaring power, less fit to be made out by inference 
than the power of modifying by treaty the laws which regulate 
our foreign trade. Now the president, with the advice and con- 
sent of the senate, has an incontestable and uncontested right to 
make a treaty of peace, of absolute inherent efficacy, and that too 
in virtue of the very same general provision in the constitution 
which the refinements of political speculation, rather than any 
known rules of construction, have led some of us to suppose ex- 
cludes a treaty of commerce. 

By what process of reasoning will you be able to extract from 
the wide field of that general provision the obnoxious case of a 
commercial treaty, without forcing along with it the case of a 
treaty of peace, and along with that again the case of every 
possible treaty ? Will you rest your distinction upon the favor- 
ite idea that a treaty cannot repeal laws competently enacted, 
or, as it is sometimes expressed, cannot trench upon the legislative 



THE TREATY-MAKING POWER. 



315 



rights of congress ? Such a distinction not only seems to be 
reproached by all the theories, numerous as they are, to which 
this bill has given birth, but is against notorious fact and recent 
experience. We have lately witnessed the operation in this respect 
of a treaty of peace, and could not fail to draw from it this lesson, — 
that no sooner does the president exert, with the consent of the 
senate, his power to make such a treaty, than your war-denoun- 
cing law, your act for letters of marque, your prohibitory statutes 
as to intercourse and licenses, and all the other concomitant and 
dependent statutes, so far as they affect the national relations 
with a foreign enemy, pass away as a dream, and in a moment 
are " with years beyond the flood." Your auxiliary agency was 
not required in the production of this effect ; and I have not 
heard that you even tendered it. You saw your laws departing, 
as it were, from the statute-books, expelled from the stronghold 
of supremacy by the single force of a treaty of peace, and you did 
not attempt to stay them ; you did not bid them linger until you 
should bid them go ; you neither put your shoulders to the 
wheel of expulsion, nor made an effort to retard it. In a word, 
you did nothing. You suffered them to flee as a shadow, and you 
know that they were reduced to shadow, not by the necromancy 
of usurpation, but by the energy of constitutional power. Yet 
you had every reason for interference then which you can have 
now. The power to make a treaty of peace stands upon the 
same constitutional footing with the power to make a commercial 
treaty. It is given by the same words. It is exerted in the same 
manner. It produces the same conflict with municipal legislation. 
The ingenuity of man cannot urge a consideration, whether upon 
the letter or the spirit of the constitution, against the existence 
of a power in the president and senate to make a valid commer- 
cial treaty, which will not, if it be correct and sound, drive us to 
the negation of the power exercised by the president and senate 
with universal approbation, to make a valid treaty of peace. 

Nay, the whole treaty-making power will be blotted from the 
constitution, and a new one, alien to its theory and practice, be 
made to supplant it, if sanction and scope be given to the princi- 
ples of this bill. This bill may indeed be considered as the first 
of many assaults, not now intended perhaps, but not therefore the 
less likely to happen, by which the treaty-making power, as cre- 
ated and lodged by the constitution, will be pushed from its place, 
and compelled to abide with the power of ordinary legislation. 
The example of this bill is beyond its ostensible limits. The 
pernicious principle, of which it is at once the child and the 
apostle, must work onward, and to the right and the left, until it 
has exhausted itself ; and it never can exhaust itself until it has 
gathered into the vortex of the legislative powers of congress 



316 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



the whole treaty-making capacity of the government For if, 
notwithstanding the directness and precision with which the con- 
stitution has marked out the department of the government by 
which it wills that treaties shall be made, and has declared that 
treaties so made shall have the force and dignity of law, the 
house of representatives can insist upon some participation in 
that high faculty, upon the simple suggestion that they are sharers 
in legislative power upon the subjects embraced by any given 
treaty, what remains to be done, for the transfer to congress of 
the entire treaty-making faculty, as it appears in the constitution, 
but to show that congress have legislative power, direct or indi- 
rect, upon every matter which a treaty can touch ? And what 
are the matters within the practicable range of a treaty, which 
your laws cannot either mould, or qualify, or influence ? Imagi- 
nation has been tasked for example, by which this question might 
be answered. It is admitted that they must be few, and we have 
been told, as I think, of no more than one. It is the case of con- 
traband of war. This case has, it seems, the double recommend- 
ation of being what is called an international case, and a case 
beyond the utmost grasp of congressional legislation. I remark 
upon it, that it is no more an international case than any matter 
of collision incident to the trade of two nations with each other. 
I remark further, that a treaty upon the point of contraband of 
war may interfere, as well as any other treaty, with an act of 
congress. A law encouraging, by a bounty or otherwise, the 
exportation of certain commodities, would be counteracted by 
an insertion into the list of contraband of w T ar, in a treaty with 
England or France, any one of those commodities. The treaty 
would look one way, the law another ; and various modes might 
readily be suggested in which congress might so legislate as to 
lay the foundation of repugnancy between its laws and the treaties 
of the president and senate with reference to contraband. I 
deceive myself greatly if a subject can be named upon which a 
like repugnancy micrbt not occur. But even if it should be prac- 
ticable to furnish, after laborious inquiry and meditation, a meagre 
and scanty inventory of some half dozen topics, to which domes- 
tic legislation cannot be made to extend, will it be pretended that 
such was the insignificant and narrow domain designed by the 
constitution for the treaty-making power ? It would appear that 
there is with some gentlemen a willingness to distinguish between 
the legislative power expressly granted to congress, and that which 
\s merely implied, and to admit that a treaty may control the results 
of the latter. I reply to those gentlemen, that one legislative power 
is exactly equivalent to another, and that, moreover, the whole 
legislative power of congress may justly be said to be expressly 
granted by the constitution, although the constitution does no 



THE TREATY-MAKING POWER. 



317 



enumerate every variety of its exercise, or indicate all the rami- 
fications into which it may diverge to suit the exigencies of the 
times. I reply, besides, that even with the qualification of this 
vague distinction, whatever may be its value or effect, the princi- 
ple of the bill leaves no adequate sphere for the treaty-making 
power. I reply, finally, that the acknowledged operation of a 
treaty of peace in repealing laws of singular strength and 
unbending character, enacted in virtue of powers communicated 
in terminis to congress, gives the distinction to the winds. 

And now that I have again adverted to the example of a treaty 
of peace, let me call upon you to reflect on the answer which that 
example affords to all the warnings we have received in this 
debate against the mighty danger of intrusting to the only depart- 
ment of the government, which the constitution supposes can 
make a treaty, the incidental prerogative of a repealing legislation. 
It is inconsistent, we are desired to believe, with the genius of the 
constitution, and must be fatal to all that is dear to freemen, that 
an executive magistrate and a senate, who are not immediate- 
ly elected by the people, should possess this authority. We hear 
from one quarter that if it be so, the public liberty is already 
in the grave ; and from another, that the public interest and 
honor are upon the verge of it. But do you not perceive 
that this picture of calamity and shame is the mere figment of 
excited fancy, disavowed by the constitution as hysterical, and 
erroneous in the case of a treaty of peace ? Do you not see that 
if there be any thing in this high-colored peril, it is a treaty of 
peace that must realize it ? Can we in this view compare with 
the power to make such a treaty, that of making a treaty of com- 
merce ? Are we unable to conjecture, while we are thus brood- 
ing over anticipated evils which can never happen, that the lofty 
character of our country (which is but another name for strength 
and power) may be made to droop by a mere treaty of peace ; 
that the national pride may be humbled ; the just hopes of the 
people blasted ; their courage tamed and broken ; their prosperity 
struck to the heart ; their foreign rivals encouraged into arrogance, 
and tutored into encroachment, by a mere treaty of peace ? I 
confidently trust, that, as this never has been so, it never will be 
so; but surely it is just as possible as that a treaty of commerce 
should ever be made to shackle the freedom of this nation, or check 
its march to the greatness and glory that await it. I know 
not, indeed, how it can seriously be thought that our liberties are 
in hazard from the small witchery of a treaty of commerce, and 
yet in none from the potent enchantments by which a treaty of 
peace may strive to enthral them. I am at a loss to conceive by 
what form of words, by what hitherto unheard-of stipulations, a 
commercial treatv is to barter away the freedom of United Ameri 
27* 



318 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



ca, or of any the smallest portion of it. I cannot figure tc my- 
self the possibility that such a project can ever find its way into 
the head or heart of any man, or set of men, whom this nation 
may select as the depositaries of its power ; but I am quite sure 
that an attempt to insert such a project in a commercial treaty, or 
in any other treaty, or in any other mode, could work no other 
effect than the destruction of those who should venture to be par- 
ties to it, no matter whether a president, senate, or a whole con- 
gress. Many extreme cases have been put for illustration in 
this debate, and this is one of them ; and I take the occasion 
which it offers to mention, that to argue from extreme cases is 
seldom logical, and upon a question of interpretation, never so. 
We can only bring back the means of delusion, if we wander into 
the regions of fiction, and explore the wilds of bare possibility in 
search of rules for real life and actual ordinary cases. By arguing 
from the possible abuse of power against the use or existence of 
it, you may and must come to the conclusion, that there ought 
not to be, and is not, any government in this country, or in the world 
Disorganization and anarchy are the sole consequences that can be 
deduced from such reasoning. Who is it that may not abuse the 
power that has been confided to him ? May not we, as well as 
the other branches of the government? And, if we may, does 
not the argument from extreme cases prove that we ought to 
have no power, and that we have no power? And does it 
not, therefore, after having served for an instant the purposes 
of this bill, turn short upon and condemn its whole theory, 
which attributes to us, not merely the power which is our 
own, but inordinate power, to be gained only by wresting it from 
others ? Our constitutional and moral security against the 
abuses of the power of the executive government have already 
been explained. I will only add, that a great and manifest abuse 
of the delegated authority to make treaties would create no obli- 
gation anywhere. If ever it should occur, as I confidently believe 
it never will, the evil must find its corrective in the wisdom and 
firmness, not of this body only, but of the w 7 hole body of the 
people cooperating with it. Tt is, after all, in the people, upon 
whose Atlantean shoulders our whole republican system reposes, 
that you must expect that recuperative power, that redeeming 
and regenerating spirit, by which the constitution is to be purified 
and redintegrated when extravagent abuse has cankered it. 

In addition to the example of a treaty of peace, which I have 
just been considering, let me put another, of which none of us 
can question the reality. The president may exercise the power 
of pardoning, save only in the case of impeachments. The pow- 
er of pardoning is not communicated by words more precise or 
comprehensive than the power to make treaties. But to what 



THE TREATY-MAKING POWER. 



319 



does it amount ? Is not every pardon, pro hac vice, a repeal of 
the penal law against which it gives protection ? Does it not ride 
over the law, resist its command and extinguish its effect ? Does 
it not even control the combined force of judicature and legisla- 
tion ? Yet, have we ever heard that your legislative rights were 
an exception out of the prerogative of mercy? Who has ever 
pretended that this faculty cannot, if regularly exerted, wrestle 
with the strongest of your statutes? I may be told, that the par- 
doning power necessarily imports a control over the penal code, 
if it be exercised in the form of a pardon. I answer, the power 
to make treaties equally imports a power to put out of the way 
such parts of the civil code as interfere with its operation, if that 
power be exerted in the form of a treaty. There is no difference 
in their essence. You legislate, in both cases, subject to the pow- 
er. And this instance furnishes another answer, as I have already 
intimated, to the predictions of abuse, with which, on this occa- 
sion, it has been endeavored to appal us. The pardoning power 
is in the president alone. He is not even checked by the neces- 
sity of senatorial concurrence. He may, by his single fiat, ex- 
tract the sting from your proudest enactments, and save from their 
vengeance a convicted offender. 

Sir, you have my general notions upon the bill before you. 
They have no claim to novelty. I imbibed them from some of 
the heroes and sages who survived the storm of that contest to 
which America was summoned in her cradle. I imbibed them 
from the father of his country. My understanding approved them 
with the full concurrence of my heart, when I was much younger 
than I am now ; and I feel no disposition to discard them now 
that age and feebleness are about to overtake me. I could say 
more — much more — upon this question ; but I want health and 
strength. It is, perhaps, fortunate for the house that I do, as it 
prevents me from fatiguing them as much as I fatigue myself. 



320 



SPEECH OF WILLIAM PINKNEY, 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 
FEBRUARY 15, 1820, 

ON 

THE MISSOURI QUESTION. 



The bill from the house of representatives, for the admission of Missouri 
into the Union, with a clause prohibiting the introduction of slaves into 
the new state, being under consideration, Mr. Pinkney spoke as follows : — 

As I am not a very frequent speaker in this assembly, and 
have shown a desire, I trust, rather to listen to the wisdom of 
others than to lay claim to superior knowledge by undertaking 
to advise, even when advice, by being seasonable in point of time, 
might have some chance of being profitable, you will, perhaps, 
bear with me if I venture to trouble you once more on that eter- 
nal subject which has lingered here, until all its natural interest 
is exhausted, and every topic connected with it is literally worn to 
tatters. I shall, I assure you, sir, speak with laudable brevitv — 
not merely on account of the feeble state of my health, and from 
some reverence for the laws of good taste which forbid me to 
speak otherwise, but also from a sense of justice to those wj,o 
honor me with their attention. My single purpose, as I suggested 
yesterday, is to subject to a friendly, yet close examination, some 
portions of a speech, imposing certainly on account of the dis- 
tinguished quarter from whence it came — not very imposing (if [ 
may so say, without departing from that respect which I sincerely 
feel and intend to manifest for eminent abilities and Jong expe- 
rience) for any other reason. 

I believe, Sir. President, that I am about as likely to retract an 
opinion which I have formed, as any member of this body, who. 
being a lover of truth, inquires after it with diligence before he 
imagines that he has found it ; but I suspect that we are all of us 
so constituted as that neither argument nor declamation, levelled 
against recorded and published decision, can easily discover a 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH, &c. 



32) 



practicable avenue through which It may hope to reach either our 
heads or our hearts. I mention this, lest it may excite surprise, 
when I take the liberty to add, that the speech of the honorable 
gentleman from New- York, upon the great subject with which it 
was principally occupied, has left me as great an infidel as it found 
me. It is possible, indeed, that if I had had the good fortune to 
hear that speech at an earlier stage of this debate, when all was 
fresh and new, although I feel confident that the analysis which it 
contained of the constitution, illustrated as it was by historical an- 
ecdote rather than by reasoning, would have been just as unsatis- 
factory to me then as it is now, I might not have been altogether 
unmoved by those warnings of approaching evil which it seemed 
to intimate, especially when taken in connection with the observa- 
tions of the same honorable gentleman on a preceding day, " that 
delays in disposing of this subject, in the manner he desires, are 
dangerous, and that we stand on slippery ground." I must be 
permitted, however (speaking only for myself), to say, that the 
hour of dismay is passed. I have heard the tones of the larum 
bell on all sides, until they have become familiar to my ear, and 
have lost their power to appal, if, indeed, they ever possessed it. 
Notwithstanding occasional appearances of rather an unfavorable 
description, I have long since persuaded myself that the Missouri 
Question, as it is called, might be laid to rest, with innocence and 
safety, by some conciliatory compromise at least, by which, as is 
our duty, we might reconcile the extremes of conflicting views 
and feelings, without any sacrifice of constitutional principle ; and 
in any event, that the Union would easily and triumphantly emerge 
from those portentous clouds with which this controversy is sup- 
posed to have environed it. 

I confess to you, nevertheless, that some of the principles an- 
nounced by the honorable gentleman from New- York,* with an 
explicitness that reflected the highest credit on his candor, did, 
when they were first presented, startle me not a little. They 
were not, perhaps, entirely new. Perhaps I had seen them before 
in some shadowy and doubtful shape, 

" If shape it might be called, that shape had none 
Distinguishable in member, joint, or limb.' 

But in the honorable gentleman's speech they were shadowy and 
doubtful no longer. He exhibited them in forms so boldly and 
accurately defined — with contours so distinctly traced — with fea- 
tures so pronounced and striking, that I was unconscious for a mo- 
ment that they might be old acquaintances. I received them as 
novi hospites within these walls, and gazed upon them with aston 



* Mr. King. 



322 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



ishment and alarm. I have recovered, however, thank God, from 
this paroxysm of terror, although not from that of astonishment. 
I have sought and found tranquillity and courage in my former 
consolatory faith. My reliance is that these principles will obtain 
no general currency ; for, if they should, it requires no gloomy 
imagination to sadden the perspective of the future. My reliance 
is upon the unsophisticated good sense and noble spirit of the 
American people. I have what I may be allowed to call a proud 
and patriotic trust, that they will give countenance to no princi- 
ples, which, if followed out to their obvious consequences, will not 
only shake the goodly fabric of the Union to its foundations, but 
reduce it to a melancholy ruin. The people of this country, if I 
do not wholly mistake their character, are wise as well as virtuous. 
They know the value of that federal association which is to them 
the single pledge and guarantee of power and peace. Their warm 
and pious affections will cling to it as to their only hope of pros- 
perity and happiness, in defiance of pernicious abstractions, by 
whomsoever inculcated, or howsoever seductive and alluring in 
their aspect. 

Sir, it is not an occasion like this, although connected, as con- 
trary to all reasonable expectation it has been, with fearful and dis- 
organizing theories, which would make our estimates, whether 
fanciful or sound, of natural law, the measure of civil rights and 
political sovereignty in the social state, that can harm the Union. 
It must, indeed, be a mighty storm that can push from its moor- 
ings this sacred ark of the common safety. It is not every tri- 
fling breeze, however it may be made to sob and howl in imita- 
tion of the tempest, by the auxiliary breath of the ambitious, the 
timid, or the discontented, that can drive this gallant vessel, 
freighted with every thing that is dear to an American bosom, upon 
the rocks, or lay it a sheer hulk upon the ocean. I may perhaps 
mistake the flattering suggestions of hope (the greatest of all flat- 
terers, as we are told) for the conclusions of sober reason. Yet it 
is a pleasing error, if it be an error, and no man shall take it from 
me. I will continue to cherish the belief, in defiance of the pub- 
lic patronage given by the honorable gentleman from New York, 
with more than his ordinary zeal and solemnity, to deadly specu- 
lations, which, invoking the name of God to aid their faculties for 
mischief, strike at all establishments, that the union of these stales 
is formed to bear up against far greater shocks than, through ail 
vicissitudes, it is ever likely to encounter. I will continue to cher- 
ish the belief that, although, like all other human institutions, it 
may for a season be disturbed, or suffer momentary eclipse by the 
transit across its disk of some malignant planet, it possesses a re- 
cuperative force, a redeeming energy in the hearts of the people, 
lhat will soon restore it to its wonted calm, and give it back its 



THE MISSOURI QUESTION. 



323 



accustomed splendor. On such a subject I will discard all hysteri- 
cal apprehensions — I will deal in no sinister auguries — I will in- 
dulge in no hypochondriacal forebodings. I will look forward to 
the future with gay and cheerful hope, and will make the pros- 
pect smile, in fancy at least, until overwhelming reality shall ren- 
der it no longer possible. 

I have said thus much, sir, in order that I may be understood 
as meeting the constitutional question as a mere question of inter- 
pretation, and as disdaining to press into the service of my argu- 
ment upon it prophetic fears of any sort, however they may be 
countenanced by an avowal, formidable by reason of the high rep- 
utation of the individual by whom it has been hazarded, of senti- 
ments the most destructive, which, if not borrowed from, are iden- 
tical with, the worst visions of the political philosophy of France, 
when all the elements of discord and misrule were let loose upon 
that devoted nation. I mean " the infinite perfectibility of man 
and his institutions," and the resolution of every thing into a state 
of nature. I have another motive, which at the risk of being 
misconstrued, I will declare without reserve. With my convic- 
tions, and with my feelings, I never will consent to hold confed- 
erated America as bound together by a silken cord, which any 
instrument of mischief may sever, to the view of monarchical 
foreigners, who look with a jealous eye upon that experiment 
which is now in progress amongst us in favor of republican free- 
dom. Let them make such prophecies as they will, and nourish 
such feelings as they may : I will not contribute to the fulfilment 
of the former, nor minister to the gratification of the latter. 

Sir, it was but the other day that we were forbidden (properly 
forbidden, I am sure, for the prohibition came from you) to as- 
sume that there existed any intention to impose a prospective re- 
straint on the domestic legislation of Missouri — a restraint to act 
upon it contemporaneously with its origin as a state, and to con- 
tinue adhesive to it through all the stages of its political existence. 
We are now, however, permitted to know that it is determined by 
a sort of political surgery to amputate one of the limbs of its lo- 
cal sovereignty, and thus mangled and disparaged, and thus only, 
to receive it into the bosom of the constitution. It is now avow- 
ed that, while Maine is to be ushered into the Union with every 
possible demonstration of studious reverence on our part, and on 
hers with colors flying, and all the other graceful accompaniments 
of honorable triumph, this ill-conditioned upstart of the west, this 
obscure foundling of a wilderness, that was but yesterday the hunt- 
ing-ground of the savage, is to find her way into the American 
family as she can, with an humiliating badge of remediless infe 
riority patched upon her garments, with the mark of recent, qual- 
ified manumission upon her, or rather with a brand upon her fore 



324 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



nead to tell the story of her territorial vassalage, and to perpet- 
uate the memory of her evil propensities. It is now avowed that, 
while the robust district of Maine is to be seated by the side of 
her truly respectable parent, coordinate in authority and honor, 
and is to be dandled into that power and dignity of which she does 
not stand in need, but which undoubtedly she deserves, the more 
infantine and feeble Missouri is to be repelled with harshness, and 
forbidden to come at all, unless with the iron collar of servitude 
about her neck, instead of the civic crown of republican freedom 
upon her brows, and is to be doomed forever to leading-strings, 
unless she will exchange those leadincr-strin£s for shackles. 

I am told that you have the power to establish this odious and 
revolting distinction, and I am referred for the proofs of that power 
to various parts of the constitution, but principally to that part of 
it which authorizes the admission of new states into the Union. 1 
am myself of opinion that it is in that part only that the advocates 
for this restriction can, with any hope of success, apply for a license 
to impose it ; and that the efforts which have been made to find it 
in other portions of that instrument, are too desperate to require to 
be encountered. I shall, however, examine those other portions 
before I have done, lest it should be supposed by those who have 
relied upon them, that what I omit to answer I believe to be un- 
answerable. 

The clause of the constitution which relates to the admission of 
new states is in these words : " The congress may admit new states 
into this Union," he, and the advocates for restriction maintain 
that the use of the word " may " imports discretion to admit or to 
reject ; and that in this discretion is wrapped up another — that of 
prescribing the terms and conditions of admission, in case you are 
willing to admit : Cujus est dare ejus est disponere. I will not for 
the present inquire whether this involved discretion to dictate the 
terms of admission belongs to you or not. It is fit that I should 
first look to the nature and extent of it. 

I think I may assume that if such a power be any thing but 
nominal, it is much more than adequate to the present object — that 
it is a power of vast expansion, to which human sagacity can assign 
no reasonable limits — that it is a capacious reservoir of authority, 
from which you may take, in all time to come, as occasion may 
serve, the means of oppression as well as of benefaction. I know 
that it professes at this moment to be the chosen instrument of 
protecting mercy, and would win upon us by its benignant smiles: 
but I know too it can frown, and play the tyrant, if it be so disposed. 
Notwithstanding the softness which it now assumes, and the care 
with which it conceals its giant proportions beneath the deceitful 
drapery of sentiment, when it next appears before you it may show 
itself with a sterner countenance and in more awful dimensions. 



THE MISSOURI QUESTION. 



325 



It is, to speak the truth, sir, a power of colossal size — if indeed it 
be not an abuse of language to call it by the gentle name of a 
power. Sir, it is a wilderness of powers, of which fancy in her 
happiest mood is unable to perceive the far-distant and shadowy 
boundary. Armed with such a power, with religion in one hand 
and philanthropy in the other, and followed with a goodly train of 
public and private virtues, you may achieve more conquests over 
sovereignties not your own than falls to the common lot of even 
uncommon ambition. By the aid of such a power, skilfully em- 
ployed, you may "bridge your way " over the Hellespont that 
separates state legislation from that of congress ; and you may do 
so for pretty much the same purpose with which Xerxes once 
bridged his way across the Hellespont, that separates Asia from 
Europe. He did so, in the language of Milton, " the liberties of 
Greece to yoke." You may do so for the analogous purpose of 
subjugating and reducing the sovereignties of states, as your taste or 
convenience may suggest, and fashioning them to your imperial will. 
There are those in this house who appear to think, and I doubt 
not sincerely, that the particular restraint now under consideration, 
is wise, and benevolent, and good: wise as respects the Union — 
good as respects Missouri — benevolent as respects the unhappy 
victims whom with a novel kindness it would incarcerate in the 
south, and bless by decay and extirpation. Let all such beware, 
lest in their desire for the effect which they believe the restriction 
will produce, they are too easily satisfied that they have the right 
to impose it. The moral beauty of the present purpose, or even 
its political recommendations (whatever they may be) can do 
nothing for a power like this, which claims to prescribe conditions 
ad libitum, and to be competent to this purpose, because it is com- 
petent to all. This restriction, if it be not smothered in its birth, 
will be but a small part of the progeny of that prolific power. It 
teems with a mighty brood, of which this may be entitled to the 
distinction of comeliness as well as of primogeniture. The rest 
may want the boasted loveliness of their predecessor, and be even 
uglier than " Lapland witches.''* 

Perhaps, sir, you will permit me to remind you that it is almost 
always in company with those considerations that interest the heart 
in some way or other, that encroachment steals into the world. A 
bad purpose throws no veil over the licenses of power. It leaves 
them to be seen as they are. It affords them no protection from 
the inquiring eye of jealousy. The danger is when a tremen- 
dous discretion like the present is attempted to be assumed 
as on this occasion, in the names of pity, of religion, of national 
honor and national prosperity ; when encroachment tricks itself 
out in the robes of piety, or humanity, or addresses itself to prido 
of country, with all its kindred passions and motives. It is then 
28 



326 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



that the guardians of the constitution are apt to slumber on their 
watch, or, if awake, to mistake for lawful rules some pernicious 
arrogation of power. 

I would not discourage authorized legislation upon those kindly, 
generous and noble feelings which Providence has given to us for 
the best of purposes : but when power to act is under discussion, 
I will not look to the end in view, lest I should become indiffer- 
ent to the lawfulness of the means. Let us discard from this high 
constitutional question, all those extrinsic considerations which 
have been forced into its discussion. Let us endeavor to approach 
it with a philosophic impartiality of temper — with a sincere desire 
to ascertain the boundaries of our authority, and a determination 
to keep our wishes in subjection to our allegiance to the consti- 
tution. 

Slavery, we are told in many a pamphlet, memorial, and speech, 
with which the press has lately groaned, is a foul blot upon our 
otherwise immaculate reputation. Let this be conceded ; yet you 
are no nearer than before to the conclusion that you possess pow- 
er which may deal with other subjects as effectually as with this. 
Slavery, we are further told, with some pomp of metaphor, is a 
canker at the root of all that is excellent in this republican empire, 
a pestilent disease that is snatching the youthful bloom from its 
cheek, prostrating its honor and withering its strength. Be it so ; 
yet if you have power to medicine to it in the way proposed, and 
in virtue of the diploma which you claim, you have also power in 
the distribution of your political alexipharmics to present the 
deadliest, drugs to every territory that would become a state, and 
bid it drink or remain a colony forever. Slavery, we are also told, 
is now " rolling onward with a rapid tide towards the boundless 
regions of the west," threatening to doom them to sterility and 
sorrow, unless some potent voice can say to it — Thus far shalt thou 
go, and no farther. Slavery engenders pride and indolence in him 
who commands, and inflicts intellectual and moral degradation on 
him who serves. Slavery, in fine, is unchristian and abominable. 
Sir, I shall not stop to deny that slavery is all this and more ; but 
I shall not think myself the less authorized to deny that it is for 
you to stay the course of this dark torrent, by opposing to it a 
mound raised up by the labors of this portentous discretion on the 
domain of others — a mound which you cannot erect but through 
the instrumentality of a trespass of no ordinary kind — not the com- 
paratively innocent trespass that beats down a few blades of grass 
which the first kind sun or the next refreshing shower may cause 
to spring again ; but that which levels with the ground the lord- 
i'msl trees of the forest, and claims immortality for the destruction 
winch it inflicts. 

I shall not, I am sure, be told that I exaggerate this power. It 



THE MISSOURI QUESTION. 



327 



has been admitted here and elsewhere that I do not. But 1 want no 
such concession. It is manifest that as a discretionary power it is 
every thing or nothing — that its head is in the clouds, or that it is a 
mere figment of enthusiastic speculation — that it has no existence, 
or that it is an alarming vortex ready to swallow up all such por- 
tions of the sovereignty of an infant state as you may think fit to 
cast into it as preparatory to the introduction into the union of the 
miserable residue. No man can contradict me when I say, that if 
you have this power, you may squeeze down a new-born sovereign 
state to the size of a pygmy, and then, taking it between finger 
and thumb, stick it into some nitch of the Union, and still continue 
by way of mockery to call it a state in the sense of the constitution. 
You may waste it to a shadow, and then introduce it into the 
society of flesh and blood an object of scorn and derision. You 
may sweat and reduce it to a thing of skin and bone, and then 
place the ominous skeleton beside the ruddy and healthful members 
of the Union, that it may have leisure to mourn the lamentable 
difference between itself and its companions, to brood over its disas- 
trous promotion, and to seek in justifiable discontent an opportunity 
for separation, and insurrection, and rebellion. What may you 
not do by dexterity and perseverance with this terrific power ? 
You may give to a new state, in the form of terms which it can- 
not refuse (as I shall show you hereafter), a statute-book of a 
thousand volumes — providing not for ordinary cases only, but even 
for possibilities ; you may lay the yoke, no matter whether light 
or heavy, upon the necks of the latest posterity; you may send 
this searching power into every hamlet for centuries to come, by 
laws enacted in the spirit of prophecy, and regulating all those dear 
relations of domestic concern which belong to local legislation, and 
which even local legislation touches with a delicate and sparing 
hand. This is the first inroad. But will it be the last ? This 
provision is but a pioneer for others of a more desolating aspect. 
It is that fatal bridge of which Milton speaks ; and when once firmly 
built, what shall hinder you to pass it when you please for the 
purpose of plundering power after power, at the expense of new 
states, as you will still continue to call them, and raising up pro- 
spective codes irrevocable and immortal, which shall leave to those 
states the empty shadows of domestic sovereignty, and convert 
them into petty pageants, in themselves. contemptible, but rendered 
infinitely more so by the contrast of their humble faculties with the 
proud and admitted pretensions of those who, having doomed them 
to the inferiority of vassals, have condescended to take them into 
their society and under their protection ? 

I shall be told, perhaps, that you can have no temptation to do 
all or any part of this, and, moreover, that you can do nothing of 
yourselves, or, in other words, without the concurrence of the new 



328 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH OIN 



state. The last of these suggestions I shall examine by and by 
To the first I answer, that it is not incumbent upon me to prove 
that this discretion will be abused. It is enough for me to prove 
the vastness of the power as an inducement to make us pause upon 
it, and to inquire with attention whether there is any apartment in 
the constitution large enough to give it entertainment. It is more 
than enough for me to show that, vast as is this power, it is, with 
reference to mere territories, an irresponsible power. Power is 
irresponsible when it acts upon those who are defenceless against 
it ; who cannot check it, or contribute to check it, in its exercise ; 
who can resist it only by force. The territory of Missouri has no 
check upon this power. It has no share in the government of the 
Union. In this body it has no representative. In the other house 
it has, by courtesy, an agent, who may remonstrate, but cannot 
vote. That such an irresponsible power is not likely to be abused, 
who will undertake to assert? If it is not, " experience is a cheat, 
and fact a liar." The power which England claimed over the 
colonies w T as such a power, and it was abused ; and hence the 
revolution. Such a power is always perilous to those who wield 
it, as well as to those on whom it is exerted. Oppression is but 
another name for irresponsible power, if history is to be trusted. 

The free spirit of our constitution and of our people is no as- 
surance against the propension of unbridled power to abuse, when 
it acts upon colonial dependants rather than upon ourselves. Free 
states, as well as despots, have oppressed those whom they were 
bound to foster ; and it is the nature of man that it should be so. 
The love of power, and the desire to display it when it can be done 
with impunity, is inherent in the human heart. Turn it out at 
the door, and it will in again at the window. Power is displayed 
in its fullest measure, and with a captivating dignity, by restraints 
and conditions. The prur it as leges ferendi is a universal disease ; 
and conditions are laws as far as they go. The vanity of human 
wisdom, and the presumption of human reason, are proverbial. 
This vanity and this presumption are often neither reasonable nor 
wise. Humanity, too, sometimes plays fantastic tricks with power. 
Time, moreover, is fruitful in temptations to convert discretionary 
power to all sorts of purposes. 

Time, that withers the strength of man, and "strews around him 
like autumnal leaves the ruins of his proudest monuments," pro- 
duces great vicissitudes in modes of thinking and feeling. It brings 
along with it, in its progress, new circumstances ; new combina- 
tions and modifications of the old ; generating new views, motives, 
and caprices, new fanaticisms of endless variety ; in short, new 
every thing. We ourselves are always changing ; and what 
to-day we have but a small desire to attempt, to-morrow becomes 
the object of our passionate aspirations. 



THE MISSOURI QUESTION. 



329 



There is such a thing as enthusiasm, moral, religious, or political, 
or a compound of all three ; — and it is wonderful what it will 
attempt, and from what imperceptible beginnings it sometimes rises 
into a mighty agent. Rising from some obscure or unknown 
source, it first shows itself a petty rivulet, which scarcely murmurs 
over the pebbles that obstruct its way ; then it swells into a 
fierce torrent, bearing all before it ; and then again, like some 
mountain stream which occasional rains have precipitated upon the 
valley, it sinks once more into a rivulet, and finally leaves its 
channel dry. Such a thing has happened. I do not say that 
it is now happening. It would not become me to say so. But 
if it should occur, woe to the unlucky territory that should be strug- 
gling to make its way into the Union at the moment when the 
opposing inundation was at its height, and at the same instant this 
wide Mediterranean of discretionary powers, which it seems is ours, 
should open up all its sluices, and, with a consentaneous rush, min- 
gle with the turbid waters of the others ! 

:3k sfe $k sit -U- 

"JP *** w *"* ^»* t)f 

" New states may be admitted by the congress into this Union." 
It is objected that the word " may " imports power, not obligation ; 
a right to decide ; a discretion to grant or refuse. 

To this it might be answered, that power is duty on many oc- 
casions. But let it be conceded that it is discretionary. What 
consequence follows ? A power to refuse, in a case like this, does 
not necessarily involve a power to exact terms. You must look 
to the result which is the declared object of the power. Whether 
you will arrive at it, or not, may depend on your will ; but you 
cannot compromise with the result intended and professed. 

What then is the professed result ? To admit a state into this 
Union. 

What is that Union ? A confederation of states equal in sove- 
reignty ; capable of every thing which the constitution does not 
forbid, or authorize congress to forbid. It is an equal Union, between 
parties equally sovereign. They were sovereign, independently 
of the Union. The object of the Union was common protection 
for the exercise of already existing sovereignty. The parties 
gave up a portion of that sovereignty to insure the remainder. As 
far as they gave it up by the common compact, they have ceased 
to be sovereign. The Union provides the means of defending the 
residue ; and it is into that Union that a new state is to come. By 
acceding to it, the new state is placed on the same footing with 
the original states. It accedes for the same purpose, i. e. protec- 
tion for its unsurrendered sovereignty. If it comes in shorn of its 
beams ; crippled and disparaged beyond the original states, it is not 
into the original Union that it comes ; for it is a different sort of 
Union. The first was Union inter pares : this is a Union between 
28* Tt 



330 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



disparates; between giants and a dwarf; between power and 
feebleness ; between full-proportioned sovereignties and a miserable 
image of power ; a thing which that very Union has shrunk and 
shrivelled from its just size, instead of preserving it in its true 
dimensions. 

It is into " this Union," i. e. the Union of the federal constitu- 
tion, that you are to admit, or refuse to admit. You can admit 
into no other. You cannot make the Union, as to the new state, 
what it is not as to the old ; for then it is not this Union that you 
open for the entrance of a new party. If you make it enter into 
a new and additional compact, is it any longer the same Union ? 

We are told that admitting a state into the Union is a compact. 
Yes ; but what sort of a compact ? A compact that it shall be a 
member of the Union, as the constitution has made it. You cannot 
new fashion it. You may make a compact to admit ; but, when 
admitted, the original compact prevails. The Union is a compact, 
with a provision of political power and agents for the accomplish- 
ment of its objects. Vary that compact as to a new state — give 
new energy to that political power, so as to make it act with more 
force upon a new state than upon the old — make the will of those 
agents more effectually the arbiter of the fate of a new state than 
of the old, and it may be confidently said that the new state has 
not entered into this Union,h\ii into another Union. How far the 
Union has been varied is; another question ; but that it has been 
varied is clear. 

If I am told that by the bill relative to Missouri, you do not 
legislate upon a new state, I answer that, you do ; and I answer 
further that it is immaterial whether you do or not. But it is upon 
Missouri, as a state, that your terms and conditions are to act. 
Until Missouri is a state, the terms and conditions are nothing. 
You legislate in the shape of terms and conditions, prospectively ; 
and you so legislate upon it that when it comes into the Union it is 
to he bound by a contract degrading and diminishing its sovereign- 
ty, and is to be stripped of rights which the original parties to the 
Union did not consent to abandon, and which that Union (so far as 
depends upon it) takes under its protection and guarantee. 

Is the right to hold slaves a right which Massachusetts enjoys ? 
[f it is, Massachusetts is under this Union in a different character 
from Missouri. The compact of Union for it is different from the 
same compact of Union for Missouri. The power of congress is 
different ; every thing which depends upon the Union is, in that 
respect, different. 

But it is immaterial whether you legislate for Missouri as a state 
i or not. The effect of your legislation is to bring it into the Union 
with a portion of its sovereignty taken away. 

But it is a state which you are to admit. What is a state in 



THE MISSOURI QUESTION. 



331 



the sense of the constitution ? It is not a state in the general, 
but a state as you find it in the constitution. A state, generally, 
is a body politic or independent political society of men. But the 
state which you are to admit must be more or less than this 
political entity. What must it be ? Ask the constitution. It 
shows what it means by a state by reference to the parties to it. 
It must be such a state as Massachusetts, Virginia, and the other 
members of the American confederacy ; a state with full sove- 
reignty except as the constitution restricts it. 

It is said that the word may necessarily implies the right of 
prescribing the terms of admission. Those who maintain this are 
aware that there are no express words (such as upon such terms 
and conditions as congress shall think jit), words which it was 
natural to expect to find in the constitution, if the effect contended 
for were meant. They put it, therefore, on the word may, and 
on that alone. 

Give to that word all the force you please, what does it import? 
That congress is not hound to admit a new state into this Union. 
Be it so, for argument's sake. Does it follow that when you con- 
sent to admit into this Union a new state, you can make it less in 
sovereign power than the original parties to that Union ; that you 
can make the Union as to it what it is not as to them ; that you 
can fashion it to your liking, by compelling it to purchase admis- 
sion into a Union by sacrificing a portion of that power which it 
is the sole purpose of the Union to maintain in all the plenitude 
which the Union itself does not impair ? Does it follow that you 
can force upon it an additional compact not found in the compact 
of Union ; that you can make it come into the Union less a 
state, in regard to sovereign power, than its fellows in that Union ; 
that you can cripple its legislative competency (beyond the con- 
stitution, which is the pact of Union, to which you make it a 
party as if it had been originally a party to it) by what you choose 
to call a condition, but which, whatever it may be called, brings 
the new government into the Union under new obligations to it, and 
with disparaged power to be protected by it. 

In a word, the whole amount of the argument on the other 
side, is, that you may refuse to admit a new state, and that 
therefore if you admit, you may prescribe the terms. 

The answer to that argument is, that even if you can refuse, 
you can prescribe r>o terms which are inconsistent with the act you 
are to do. You can prescribe no conditions which, if carried into 
effect, would make the new state less a sovereign state than, under 
the Union as it stands, it would be. You can prescribe no terms 
which will make the compact of union between it and the original 
states essentially different from that compact among the original 
states. You may admit, or refuse to admit: but if you admit, 



332 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



you must admit a state in the sense of the constitution, a state 
with all such sovereignty as belongs to the original parties ; and it 
must be into this Union that you are to admit it, not into a Union 
of your own dictating, formed out of the existing Union by qualifi- 
cations and new compacts, altering its character and effect, and 
making it fall short of its protecting energy in reference to the new 
state, whilst it acquires an energy of another sort, the energy of 
restraint and destruction. 

I have thus endeavored to show, that even if you have a dis- 
cretion to refuse to admit, you have no discretion, if you are will- 
ing to admit, to insist upon any terms that impair the sovereignty 
of the admitted state as it would otherwise stand in the Union by 
the constitution which receives it into its bosom. To admit or not, 
is for you to decide. Admission once conceded, it follows as a 
corollary that you must take the new state as an equal companion 
with its fellows : that you cannot recast or new-model the Union 
pro hac vice ; but that you must receive it into the actual Union, 
and recognize it as a parcener in the common inheritance, without 
any other shackles than the rest have, by the constitution, submit- 
ted to bear ; without any other extinction of power than is the 
work of the constitution acting indifferently upon all. 

I may be told, perhaps, that the restriction, in this case, is the act 
of Missouri itself ; that your law is nothing without its consent, 
and derives its efficacy from that alone. 

I shall have a more suitable occasion to speak on this topic 
hereafter, when I come to consider the treaty which ceded Louis- 
iana to the United States. But I will say a few words upon it 
now, of a more genera] application than it will in that branch of the 
argument be necessary to use. 

A territory cannot surrender to congress, by anticipation, the 
whole, or a part of the sovereign power, which, by the constitution 
of the Union, will belong to it when it becomes a state and a mem- 
ber of the Union. Its consent is, therefore, nothing. It is in no 
situation to make this surrender. It is under the government of 
congress : if it can barter away a part of its sovereignty, by anti- 
cipation, it can do so as to the whole. For where will you stop ? 
If it does not cease to be a state, in the sense of the constitution, 
with only a certain portion of sovereign power, what other smaller 
portion will have that effect ? If you depart from the standard of 
the constitution, i. e. the quantity of domestic sovereignty left in 
the first contracting states, and secured by the original compact of 
Union, where will you get another standard ? Consent is no 
standard, — for consent may be gained to a surrender of all. 

No state or territory, in order to become a state, can alienate or 
surrender any portion of its sovereignty to the Union, or to a sister 
state, or to a foreign nation. It is under an incapacity to disqual- 



THE MISSOURI QUESTION. 



333 



ify itself for all the purposes of government left to it in the con- 
stitution, by stripping itself of attributes which arise from the nat- 
ural equality of states, and which the constitution recognizes, not 
only because it does not deny them, but presumes them to remain 
as they exist by the law of nature and nations. Inequality in the 
sovereignty of states is unnatural, and repugnant to all the princi- 
ples of that law. Hence we find it laid down by the text writers 
on public law, that "Nature has established a perfect equality of 
rights between independent nations ; " and that " whatever the 
quality of a free sovereign nation gives to one, it gives to another."* 
The constitution of the United States proceeds upon the truth of 
this doctrine. It takes the states as it finds them, free and sove- 
reign alike by nature. It receives from them portions of 
their power for the general good, and provides for the exercise of 
it by organized political bodies. It diminishes the individual sove- 
reignty of each, and transfers, what it subtracts, to the government 
which it creates : it takes from all alike, and leaves them relatively 
to each other equal in sovereign power. 

The honorable gentleman from New York has put the consti- 
tutional argument altogether upon the clause relative to admission 
of new states into the Union. He does not pretend that you can 
find the power to restrain, in any extent, elsewhere. It follows 
that it is not a particular power to impose this restriction, but a 
power to impose restrictions ad libitum. It is competent to this, 
because it is competent to every thing. But he denies that there 
can be any power in man to hold in slavery his fellow-creature, 
and argues, therefore, that the prohibition is no restraint at all, 
since it does not interfere with the sovereign powers of Missouri. 

One of the most signal errors with which the argument on the 
other side has abounded, is this of considering the proposed re- 
striction as if levelled at the introduction or establishment of 
slavery. And hence the vehement declamation, which, among 
other things, has informed us that slavery originated in fraud or 
violence. 

The truth is, that the restriction has no relation, real or pre- 
tended, to the right of making slaves of those who are free, or 
of introducing slavery where it does not already exist. It applies 
to those who are admitted to be already slaves, and who (with 
their posterity) would continue to be slaves if they should remain 
where they are at present ; and to a place where slavery already 
exists by the local law. Their civil condition will not be altered 
by their removal from Virginia, or Carolina, to Missouri. They 
will not be more slaves than they now are. Their abode, indeed. 



* Vattcl, Droit des Gens. liv. 2, c. 3, s. 36. 



334 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



will be different, but their bondage the same. Their numbers may 
possibly be augmented by the diffusion, and I think they will. 
But this can only happen because their hardships will be mitiga- 
ted, and their comforts increased. The checks to population, 
which exist in the older states, will be diminished. The restriction, 
therefore, does not prevent the establishment of slavery, either 
with reference to persons or place, but simply inhibits the removal 
from place to place (the law in each being the same) of a slave, or 
make his emancipation the consequence of that removal. It acts 
professedly merely on slavery as it exists, and thus acting restrains 
its present lawful effects. That slavery, like many other human 
institutions, originated in fraud or violence, may be conceded ; but, 
however it originated, it is established among us, and no man 
seeks a further establishment of it by new importations of freemen 
to be converted into slaves. On the contrary, all are anxious to 
mitigate its evils, by all the means within the reach of the appro- 
priate authority, the domestic legislatures of the different states. 

It can be nothing to the purpose of this argument, therefore, as 
the gentlemen themselves have shaped it, to inquire what was the 
origin of slavery. What is it now, and who are they that en- 
deavor to innovate upon what it now is (the advocates of this 
restriction who desire change by unconstitutional means, or its 
opponents who desire to leave the whole matter to local regula- 
tion), are the only questions worthy of attention. 

Sir, if we «too closely look to the rise and progress of long- 
sanctioned establishments and unquestioned rights, we may dis- 
cover other subjects than that of slavery, with which fraud and 
violence may claim a fearful connection, and over which it may be 
our interest to throw the mantle of oblivion. What was the set- 
tlement of our ancestors in this country but an invasion of the 
rights of the barbarians who inhabited it? That settlement, with 
slight exceptions, was effected by the slaughter of those who did 
no more than defend their native land against the intruders of 
Europe, or by unequal compacts and purchases, in which feeble- 
ness and ignorance had to deal with power and cunning. The 
savages, who once built their huts where this proud capitol, rising 
from its recent ashes, exemplifies the sovereignty of the American 
people, were swept away by the injustice of our fathers, and their 
domain usurped by force, or obtained by artifices yet more crimi- 
nal. Our continent was full of those aboriginal inhabitants. 
Where are they, or their descendants ? Either " with years beyond 
the flood," or driven back by the swelling tide of our population 
from the borders of the Atlantic to the deserts of the wesi. You 
follow still the miserable remnants, and make contracts with them 
that seal their ruin. You purchase their lands, of which they 
know not the value, in order that you may sell them to advantage, 



THE MISSOURI QUESTION. 



335 



increase your treasure, and enlarge your empire. Yet further — 
you pursue as they retire ; and they must continue to retire until 
the Pacific shall stay their retreat, and compel them to pass away 
as a dream. Will you recur to those scenes of various iniquity for 
any other purpose than to regret and lament them ? Will you pry 
into them with a view to shake ;md impair your rights of property 
and dominion ? 

But the broad denial of the sovereign right of Missouri, if it 
shall become a sovereign state, to recognize slavery by its laws, is 
rested upon a variety of grounds, all of which I will examine. 

It is an extraordinary fact, that they who urge this denial with 
such ardent zeal, stop short of it in their conduct. There are 
now slaves in Missouri whom they do not insist upon delivering 
from their chains. Yet if it is incompetent to sovereign power to 
continue slavery in Missouri, in respect of slaves who may yet be 
carried thither, show me the power that can continue it in respect 
of slaves who are there already. Missouri is out of the old limits 
of the Union ; and beyond those limits, it is said, we can give no 
countenance to slavery, if we can countenance or tolerate it any 
where. It is plain, that there can be no slaves beyond the Mis- 
sissippi at this moment, but in virtue of some power to make or 
keep them so. What sort of power was it that has made or kept 
them so ? Sovereign power it could not be, according to the hon- 
orable gentlemen from Pennsylvania and New Hampshire;* and 
if sovereign power is unequal lo such a purpose, less than sove- 
reign power is yet more unequal to it. The laws of Spain and France 
could do nothing, the laws of the territorial government of Mis- 
souri could do nothing towards such a result, if it be a result which 
no laws, in other words, no sovereignty, could accomplish. The 
treaty of 1803 could do no more, in this view, than the laws of 
France, or Spain, or the territorial government of Missouri. A 
treaty is an act of sovereign power, taking the shape of a compact 
between the parties to it ; and that which sovereign power cannot 
reach at all, it cannot reach by a treaty. Those who are now 
held in bondage, therefore, in Missouri, and their issue, are entitled 
to be free, if there be any truth in the doctrine of the honorable 
gentlemen ; and if the proposed restriction leaves all such in 
slavery, it thus discredits the very foundation on which it reposes. 
To be inconsistent is the fate of false principles ; but this incon- 
sistency is the more to be remarked, since it cannot be referred to 
mere considerations of policy without admitting that such consid- 
erations may be preferred (without a crime) to what is deemed a 
paramount and indispensable duty. 

It is here too, that I must be permitted to observe, that the hon 



* Mr. Roberts, Mr. Lowrie, and Mr. Morril. 



336 



MR. riNKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



orable gentlemen have taken great pains to show that this restric- 
tion is a mere work of supererogation by the principal argument 
on which they rest the proof of its propriety. Missouri, it is said, 
can have no power to do w 7 hat the restriction would prevent. It 
would be void, therefore, without the restriction. Why then, I 
ask, is the restriction insisted upon ? Restraint implies that there 
is something to be restrained : but the gentlemen justify the re- 
straint by showing that there is nothing upon which it can operate ! 
They demonstrate the wisdom and necessity of restraint, by de- 
monstrating that with or without restraint, the subject is in the same 
predicament. This is to combat with a man of straw, and to put 
fetters upon a shadow. 

The gentlemen must, therefore, abandon either their doctrine or 
their restriction, their argument or their object; for they are di- 
rectly in conflict, and reciprocally destroy each other. It is evi- 
dent that they will not abandon their object, and, of course, I must 
believe, that they hold their argument in as little real estimation as 
I myself do. The gentlemen can scarcely be sincere believers in 
their own principle. They have apprehensions, which they en- 
deavor to conceal, that Missouri, as a state, will have power to 
continue slavery within its limits ; and, if they will not be offended, 
I will venture to compare them, in this particular, with the duellist 
in Sheridan's comedy of the Rivals, who, affecting to have no fear 
whatever of his adversary, is, nevertheless, careful to admonish sir 
Lucius to hold him fast. 

Let us take it for granted, however, that they are in earnest in 
their doctrine, and that it is very necessary to impose what they 
prove to be an unnecessary restraint : how do they support that 
doctrine ? 

The honorable gentleman on the other side # has told us as a 
proof of his great position (that man cannot enslave his fellow- 
man, in which is implied that all laws upholding slavery are ab- 
solute nullities) ; that the nations of antiquity as well as of modern 
times have, concurred in laying down that position as incontro- 
vertible. 

He refers us in the first place to the Roman law, in which he 
rinds it laid down as a maxim : Jure naturali omncs homines a 7 ) 
initio liberi nascebantur. From the manner in which this maxim 
was pressed upon us, it would not readily have been conjectured 
that the honorable gentleman who used it had borrowed it from a 
slave-holding empire, and still less from a book of the Institutes 
of Justinian, which treats of slavery, and justifies and regulates it. 
Had he given us the context, we should have had the modifica- 
tions of which the abstract doctrine was in the judgment of the 



* Mr. King. 



THE MISSOURI QUESTION. 



337 



Roman law susceptible. We should have had an explanation of 
the competency of that law, to convert, whether justly or unjust- 
y, freedom into servitude, and to maintain the right of a master 
to the service and obedience of his slave. 

The honorable gentleman might also have gone to Greece for 
a similar maxim and a similar commentary, speculative and 
practical. 

He next refers us to Magna Charta. I am somewhat familiar 
with Magna Charta, and I am confident that it contains no such 
maxim as the honorable gentleman thinks he has discovered in 
it. The great charter was extorted from John, and his feeble son 
and successor, by haughty slave-holding barons, who thought only 
of themselves and the commons of England (then inconsiderable), 
whom they wished to enlist in their efforts against the crown. 
There is not in it a single word which condemns civil slavery. 
Freemen only are the objects of its protecting care. f( Nullus 
liber homo," is its phraseology. The serfs, who were chained to 
the soil — the villeins regardant and in gross, were left as it found 
them. All England was then full of slaves, whose posterity 
would by law remain slaves as with us, except only that the issue 
followed the condition of the father instead of the mother. The 
rule was, " Partus sequitur patrem ; " a rule more favorable, un- 
doubtedly, from the very precariousness of its application to the 
gradual extinction of slavery, than ours, which has been drawn 
from the Roman law, and is of sure and unavoidable effect. 

Still less has the Petition of Right, presented to Charles I., 
by the Long Parliament, to do with the subject of civil slavery. 
It looked merely, as Magna Charta had not done before it, to the 
freemen of England, and sought only to protect them against 
royal prerogative and the encroaching spirit of the Stuarts. 

x4s to the Bill of Rights, enacted by the Convention Parlia- 
ment of 168S, it is almost a duplicate of the Petition of Right, 
and arose out of the recollection of that political tyranny from 
which the nation had just escaped, and the recurrence of which 
it was intended to prevent. It contains no abstract principles. 
It deals only with practical checks upon the power of the monarch, 
and in safeguards for institutions essential to the preservation of 
the public liberty. That it was not designed to anathematize civil 
slavery may be taken for granted, since at that epoch, and long af- 
terwards, the English government inundated its foreign plantations 
with slaves, and supplied other nations with them as merchandise, 
under the sanction of solemn treaties negotiated for that purpose 
And here I cannot forbear to remark that we owe it to that same 
government, when it stood towards us in the relation of parent 
to child, that involuntary servitude exists in our land, and that 
we are now deliberating whether the prerogative of correcting if 
29 U u 



33S 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



evils belongs to the national or the state governments. In the 
early periods of our colonial history, every thing was done by the 
mother country to encourage the importation of slaves into North 
America, and the measures which were adopted by the colonial 
assemblies to prohibit it were uniformly negatived by the crown. 
It is not therefore our fault, nor the fault of our ancestors, that 
this calamity has been entailed upon us ; and notwithstanding the 
ostentation with which the loitering abolition of the slave-trade by 
the British parliament has been vaunted, the principal considera- 
tion which at last reconciled it to that measure was, that by suitable 
care, the slave population in their West India islands (already ful- 
ly stocked) might be kept up and even increased without the aid 
of importation. In a word, it was cold calculations of interest, 
and not the suggestions of humanity, or a respect for the philan- 
thropic principles of Mr. Wilberforce, which produced their tardy 
abandonment of that abominable traffic. 

Of the Declaration of our Independence, which has also been 
quoted in support of the perilous doctrines now urged upon us, 1 
need not now speak at large. I have shown on a former occa 
sion how idle it is to rely upon that instrument for such a purpose, 
and I will not fatigue you by mere repetition. The self-evident 
truths announced in the Declaration of Independence are not truths 
at all, if taken literally ; and the practical conclusions contained 
in the same passage of that Declaration prove that they were 
never designed to be so received. 

The articles of confederation contain nothing on the subject ; 
whilst the actual constitution recognizes the legal existence of 
slavery by various provisions. The power of prohibiting the slave 
trade is involved in that of regulating commerce ; but this is cou- 
pled with an express inhibition to the exercise of it for twenty 
years. How then can that constitution, which expressly permits 
the importation of slaves, authorize the national government to set 
on foot a crusade against slavery ? 

The clause respecting fugitive slaves is affirmative and active in 
its effects. It is a direct sanction and positive protection of the 
right of the master to the services of his slave as derived under the 
local laws of the states. The phraseology in which it is wrapped 
up still leaves the intention clear, and the words, "persons held to 
service or labor in one state under the laws thereof," have al- 
ways been interpreted to extend to the case of slaves, in the vari- 
ous acts of congress which have been passed to give efficacy to 
the provision, and in the judicial application of those laws. So 
also in the clause prescribing the ratio of representation ; the 
phrase, "three fifths of all other persons," is equivalent to slaves 
or it means nothing. And yet we are told that those who are act- 
ing under a constitution which sanctions the existence of slavery 



THE MISSOURI QUESTION. 



339 



in those states which choose to tolerate it, are at liberty to hold 
that no law can sanction its existence ! 

It is idle to make the rightfulness of an act the measure of 
sovereign power. The distinction between sovereign power and 
the moral right to exercise it, has always been recognized. All 
political power may be abused ; but is it to stop where abuse may 
begin ? The power of declaring war is a power of vast capacity 
for mischief, and capable of inflicting the most wide-spread deso- 
lation. But it is given to congress without stint and without 
measure. Is a citizen, or are the courts of justice, to inquire 
whether that, or any other law, is just, before they obey or execute 
it ? And are there any degrees of injustice which will withdraw 
from sovereign power the capacity of making a given law ? 

But sovereignty is said to be deputed power. Deputed — by 
whom ? By the people, because the power is theirs. And if it 
be theirs, does not the restriction take it away ? Examine the 
constitution of the Union, and it will be seen that the 'people of 
the states are regarded as well as the states themselves. The 
constitution was made by the people, and ratified by the people. 

Is it fit, then, to hold that all the sovereignty of a state is in the 
government of the state ? So much is there as the people grant ; 
and the people can take it away, or give more, or new model what 
they have already granted. It is this right which the proposed 
restriction takes from Missouri. You give them an immortal con- 
stitution, depending on your will, not on theirs. The people and 
their posterity are to be bound forever by this restriction ; and 
upon the same principle, any other restriction may be imposed. 
Where, then, is their power to change the constitution, and to 
devolve new sovereignty upon the state government ? You limit 
their sovereign capacity to do it ; and when you talk of a state, 
you mean the people as well as the government. The people are 
the source of all power — you dry up that source. They are the 
reservoir — you take out of it what suits you. 

It is said that this government is a government of deputed pow- 
ers. So is every government ; and what power is not deputed 
remains. But the people of the United States can give it more 
if they please, as the people of each state can do in respect to its 
own government. And here it is well to remember that this is a 
government of enumerated as well as deputed powers ; and to 
examine the clause as to the admission of new states, with that 
principle in view. Now assume that it is a part of the sovereign 
power of the people of Missouri to continue slavery, and to de- 
volve that power upon its government — and then to take it away 
— and then to give it again. The government is their creature ; 
the means of exercising their sovereignty, and they can vary those 
means at their pleasure. Independently of the Union, their power 



340 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



would be unlimited. By coming into the Union, they part with 
some of it, and are thus less sovereign. 

Let us then see whether they part with this power. 

If they have parted with this portion of sovereign power, it must 
be under that clause of the national constitution which gives to 
congress " power to admit new states into this Union." And it is 
said that this necessarily implies the authority of prescribing the 
conditions, upon which such new states shall be admitted. This 
has been put into the form of a syllogism, which is thus stated : 

Major. Every universal proposition includes all the means, 
manner and terms of the act to which it relates. 

Minor. But this is a universal proposition. 

Conclusion. Therefore, the means, manner, and terms are in- 
volved in it. 

But this syllogism is fallacious, and any thing else may be 
proved by it, by assuming one of its members which involves 
the conclusion. The minor is a mere postulate. 

Take it in this way : 

Major. None but a universal proposition includes in itself the 
terms and conditions of the act to be done. 

Minor. But this is not such a universal proposition. 

Conclusion. Therefore, it does not contain in itself the terms 
and conditions of the act. 

In both cases the minor is a gratuitous postulate. 

But I deny that a universal proposition, as to a specific act, in- 
volves the terms and conditions of that act, so as to vary it and 
substitute another and a different act in its place. The proposition 
contained in the clause is universal in one sense only. It is par- 
ticular in another. It is universal as to the power to admit or 
refuse. It is particular as to the being or thing to be admitted, 
and the compact by which it is to be admitted. The sophistry 
consists in extending the universal part of the proposition in such 
a manner as to make out of it another universal proposition. It 
consists in confounding the right to produce or to refuse to produce 
a certain defined effect, with a right to produce a different effect 
by refusing otherwise to produce any effect at all. It makes the 
actual right the instrument of obtaining another right, with which 
the actual right is incompatible. It makes, in a word, lawful power 
the instrument of unlawful usurpation. The residt is kept out of 
sight by this mode of reasoning. The discretion to decline that 
result, which is called a universal proposition, is singly obtruded 
upon us. But in order to reason correctly, you must keep in view 
the defined result, as well as the discretion to produce or to decline 
to produce it. The result is the particular part of the proposi- 
tion ; therefore, the discretion to produce or decline it, is the 
jniversal part of it. But because the last is found to be universal, 



THE MISSOURI QUESTION. 



341 



it is taken for granted that the first is also universal. This is a 
sophism too manifest to impose. 

But discarding the machinery of syllogisms as unfit for such a 
discussion as this, let us look at the clause with a view of inter- 
preting it by the rules of sound logic and common sense. 

The power is " to admit new states into this Union ; " and it may 
be safely conceded that here is discretion to admit or refuse. 
The question is, what must we do if we do any thing ? What 
must we admit, and into what ? The answer is a state ; and into 
this Union. 

The distinction between federal rights and local rights is an 
idle distinction. Because the new state acquires federal rights, 
it is not, therefore, in this Union. The Union is a compact ; and 
is it an equal party to that compact, because it has equal federal 
rights ? 

How is the Union formed ? By equal contributions of power. 
Uake one member sacrifice more than other, and it becomes un- 
equal. The compact is of two parts. 

1. The thing obtained — federal rights. 

2. The price paid — local sovereignty. 

You may disturb the balance of the Union, either by diminishing 
the thing acquired, or increasing the sacrifice paid. 

What were the purposes of coming into the Union among the 
original states? The states were originally sovereign without 
limit, as to foreign and domestic concerns. But being incapable 
of protecting themselves singly, they entered into the Union to 
defend themselves against foreign violence. The domestic concerns 
of the people were not, in general, to be acted on by it. The 
security of the power of managing them by domestic legislation, 
is one of the great objects of the Union. The Union is a means. 
not an end. By requiring greater sacrifices of domestic power, the 
end is sacrificed to the means. Suppose the surrender of all, or 
nearly all, the domestic powers of legislation were required ; the 
means would there have swallowed up the end. 

The argument that the compact may be enforced, shows that 
the federal predicament is changed. The power of the Union not 
only acts on persons or citizens, but on the faculty of the govern- 
ment, and restrains it in a way which the constitution no where 
authorizes. This new obligation takes away a right which is ex- 
pressly " reserved to the people or the states," since it is no where 
granted to the government of the Union. You cannot do indirectlv 
what you cannot do directly. It is said that this Union is compe- 
tent to make compacts. Who doubts it ? But can you make 
this compact? I insist that you cannot make it, because it is 
repugnant to the thing to be done. 

The effect of such a compact would be to produce that inequalit\ 
29* 



342 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



in the Union, to which the constitution, in ' all its provisions, is 
adverse. Every thing in it looks to equality among the members 
of the Union. Under it, you cannot produce inequality. Nor can 
you get beforehand of the constitution, and do it by anticipation. 
Wait until a state is in the Union, and you cannot do it: yet it i? 
only upon the state in the Union that what you do begins to act. 

^* ^? -J^ ^ ^ 

But it seems, that although the proposed restriction may not be 
justified by the clause of the constitution which gives power to 
admit new states into the Union, separately considered, there are 
other parts of the constitution, which, combined with that clause, 
will warrant it. And, first, we are informed that there is a clause 
in this instrument which declares that congress shall guarantee to 
every state a republican form of government ; that slavery and 
such a form of government are incompatible ; and finally, as a 
conclusion from these premises, that congress not only have a right, 
but are bound to exclude slavery from a new state. Here again, 
sir, there is an edifying inconsistency between the argument and 
the measure which it professes to vindicate. By the argument it 
is maintained that Missouri cannot have a republican form of gov- 
ernment, and at the same time tolerate negro slavery. By the 
measure it is admitted that Missouri may tolerate slavery, as to 
persons already in bondage there, and be nevertheless fit to be 
received into the Union. What sort of constitutional mandate is 
this, which can thus be made to bend, and truckle, and compromise, 
as if it were a simple rule of expediency that might admit of excep- 
tions upon motives of countervailing expediency. There can be 
no such pliancy in the peremptory provisions of the constitution. 
They cannot be obeyed by moieties and violated in the same 
ratio. They must be followed out to their full extent, or treated 
with that decent neglect which has at least the merit of forbearing 
to render contumacy obtrusive by an ostentatious display of the 
very duty which we in part abandon. If the decalogue could be 
observed in this casuistical manner, we might be grievous sinners, 
and yet be liable to no reproach. We might persist in all our 
habitual irregularities, and still be spotless. We might, for exam- 
ple, continue to covet our neighbors' goods, provided they were 
the same neighbors whose goods we had before coveted ; and so 
of all the other commandments. 

Will the gentlemen tell us that it is the quantity of slaves, nol 
the quality of slavery, which takes from a government the republi- 
can form ? Will they tell us (for they have not yet told us) that 
there are constitutional grounds (to say nothing of common sense)' 
upon which the slavery wnich now exists in Missouri may be 
reconciled with a republican form of government, while any addi- 
f ion to the number of iL slaves (the quality of slavery remaining the 



THE MISSOURI QUESTION. 



3i3 



same) from the other states, will be repugnant to that form, and 
metamorphose it into some nondescript government disowned by 
the constitution ? They cannot, have recourse to the treaty of 
1803 for such a distinction, since, independently of what 1 have 
before observed on that head, the gentlemen have contended that 
the treaty has nothing to do with the matter. They have cut them- 
selves off from all chance of a convenient distinction in or oat of 
that treaty, by insisting that slavery beyond the old United States 
is rejected by the constitution, and by the law of God, as discovera- 
ble by the aid of either reason or revelation ; and moreover, that 
the treaty does not include the case, and if it did, could not make 
it better. They have therefore completely discredited their own 
theory by their own practice, and left us no theory worthy of 
being seriously controverted. This peculiarity in reasoning of 
giving out a universal principle, and coupling with it a practical 
concession that it is wholly fallacious, has indeed run through the 
greater part of the arguments on the other side ; but it is not, as I 
think, the more imposing on that account, or the less liable to the 
criticism which I have here bestowed upon it. 

There is a remarkable inaccuracy on this branch of the subject, 
into which the gentlemen have fallen, and to which I will give a 
moment's attention without laying unnecessary stress upon it. The 
government of a new state, as well as of an old state, must, I agree, 
be republican in its form. But it has not been very clearly ex- 
plained what the laws, which such a government may enact, can 
have to do with its form. The form of the government is material 
only as it furnishes a security that those laws will protect, and 
promote the public happiness, and be made in a republican spirit. 
The people being, in such a government, the fountain of all power, 
and their servants being periodically responsible to them for its 
exercise, the constitution of the Union takes for granted (except so 
far as it imposes limitations), that every such exercise will be just 
and salutary. The introduction or continuance of civil slavery is 
manifestly the mere result of the power of making laws. It does 
not in any degree enter into the form of the government. It 
presupposes that form already settled, and takes its rise not from 
the particular frame of the government, but from the general power 
which every government involves. Make the government what 
you will in its organization and in the distribution of its authorities, 
the introduction or continuance of involuntary servitude by the 
legislative power which it has created can have no influence on 
its preestablished form, whether monarchical, aristocratical, or 
republican. The form of government is still one thing, and the 
law, being a simple exertion of the ordinary faculty of legislation 
by those to whom that form of government has intrusted it, 
another. The gentlemen, however, identify an act of legislation 



344 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH OJN 



sanctioning involuntary servitude with the form of gov ;n. nent 
itself, and then assure us that the last is changed retroactively by 
the first, and is no longer republican ! 

But let us proceed to take a rapid glance at the reasons which 
have been assigned for this notion that involuntary servitude and 
a republican form of government are perfect antipathies. The 
gentleman from New Hampshire * has defined a republican gov- 
ernment to be that in which all the men participate in its power and 
privileges ; from whence it follows that where there are slaves, it 
can have no existence. A definition is no proof, however, and 
even if it be dignified (as I think it was) with the name of a maxim, 
the matter is not much mended. It is lord Bacon who says 
i; that nothing is so easily made as a maxim ; " and certainly a 
definition is manufactured with equal facility. A political maxim 
is the work of induction, and cannot stand against experience, or 
stand on any thing but experience. But this maxim, or definition, 
or whatever else it may be, sets fact at defiance. If you go back 
to antiquity, you will obtain no countenance for this hypothesis ; 
and if you look at home, you will gain still less. I have read that 
Sparta, and Rome, and Athens, and many others of the ancient 
family, were republics. They were so in form, undoubtedly — the 
last approaching nearer to a perfect democracy than any other 
government which has yet been known in the world. Judging of 
them also by their fruits, they were of the highest order of repub- 
lics. Sparta could scarcely be any other than a republic, when a 
Spartan matron could say to her son, just marching to battle, Re- 
turn victorious, or return no more. It was the unconquerable 
spirit of liberty, nurtured by republican habits and institutions, that 
illustrated the pass of Thermopylae. Yet slavery was not only 
tolerated in Sparta, but was established by one of the fundamental 
laws of Lycurgus, having for its object the encouragement of that 
very spirit. Attica was full of slaves ; yet the love of liberty was 
its characteristic. What else was it that foiled the whole power 
of Persia at Marathon and Salamis ? What other soil than that 
which the genial sun of republican freedom illuminated and warm- 
ed, could have produced such men as Leonidas and Miltiades, 
Themistocles and Epaminondas ? Of Rome it would be superflu- 
ous to speak at large. It is sufficient to name the mighty mistress 
of the world, before Sylla gave the first stab to her liberties, and 
the great dictator accomplished their final ruin, to be reminded of 
the practicability of union between civil slavery and an ardent 
love of liberty cherished by republican establishments. 

If we return home for instruction upon this point, we perceive 
that same union exemplified in many a state, in which f* Liberty 

* Mr. Mcrril. 



THE MISSOURI QUESTION 



345 



has a temple in every house, an altar in every heart," while invol- 
untary servitude is seen in every direction. Is it denied that those 
states possess a republican form of government ? If it is, why 
does our power of correction sleep ? Why is the constitutional 
guaranty suffered to be inactive ? Why am I permitted to fatigue 
you. as the representative of a slave-holding state, with the discus- 
sion of the nagce canorce (for so I think them) that have been 
forced into this debate contrary to all the remonstrances of taste 
and prudence ? Do gentlemen perceive the consequences to which 
their arguments must lead, if they are of any value ? Do they 
reflect that they lead to emancipation in the old United States — • 
or to an exclusion of Delaware, Maryland, and all the south, and 
a great portion of the west from the Union ? My honorable friend 
from Virginia has no business here, if this disorganizing creed be 
any thing but the production of a heated brain. The state to 
which I belong must " perform a lustration " — must purge and 
purify herself from the feculence of civil slavery, and emulate the 
states of the north in their zeal for throwing down the gloomy idol 
which we are said to worship, before her senators can have any 
title to appear in this high assembly. It will be in vain to urge 
that the old United States are exceptions to the rule ; or rather 
(as the gentlemen express it), that they have no disposition to ap- 
ply the rule to them. There can be no exceptions, by implication 
only, to such a rule ; and expressions which justify the exemption 
of the old states by inference, will justify the like exemption of 
Missouri, unless they point exclusively to them, as I have shown 
they do not. The guarded manner, too, in which some of the 
gentlemen have occasionally expressed themselves on this subject, 
is somewhat alarming. -They have no disposition to meddle with 
slavery in the old United States. Perhaps not ; but who shall 
answer for their successors ? Who shall furnish a pledge that the 
principle once ingrafted into the constitution, will not grow, and 
spread, and fructify, and overshadow the whole land ? It is the 
natural office of such a principle to wrestle with slavery, whereso- 
ever it finds it. New states, colonized by the apostles of this 
principle, will enable it to set on foot a fanatical crusade against 
all who still continue to tolerate it, although no practicable means 
are pointed out by which they can get rid of it consistently with 
their own safety. At any rate, a present, forbearing disposition, in 
a few or in many, is not a security upon which much reliance can 
be placed upon a subject as to which so many selfish interests and 
ardent feelings are connected with the cold calculations of policy. 
Admitting, however, that the old United States are in no danger 
from this principle, why is it so ? There can be no other answer 
(which these zealous enemies of slavery can use) than that the 
constitution recognizes slaver v as existing or capable of existing in 

X x 



346 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



those states. The constitution, then, admits that slavery and a 
republican form of government are not incongruous. It associates 
and binds them up together, and repudiates this wild imagination 
which the gentlemen have pressed upon us with such an air of 
triumph. But the constitution does more, as I have heretofore 
proved. It concedes that slavery may exist in anew state, as well 
as in an old one — since the language in which it recognizes slavery 
comprehends new states as well as actual. I trust then that I shall 
be forgiven if I suggest, that no eccentricity in argument can be 
more trying to human patience, than a formal assertion that a con- 
stitution, to which slave-holding states were the most numerous 
parties, in which slaves are treated as property as well as persons, 
and provision is made for the security of that property, and even 
for an augmentation of it, by a temporary importation from Africa, 
a clause commanding congress to guaranty a republican form of 
government to those very states, as well as to others, authorizes 
you to determine that slavery and a republican form of government 
cannot coexist. 

But if a republican form of government is that in which all the 
men have a share in the public power, the slave-holding states 
will not alone retire from the Union. The constitutions of some of 
the other states do not sanction universal suffrage, or universal 
eligibility. They require citizenship, and age, and a certain 
amount of property, to give a title to vote or to be voted for ; and 
they who have not those qualifications are just as much disfran- 
chised, with regard to the government and its power, as if they 
were slaves. They have civil rights, indeed (and so have slaves 
in a less degree) ; but they have no share in the government. 
Their province is to obey the laws, not to assist in making them. 
All such states must therefore be forisfamiliated with Virginia and 
the rest, or change their system ; for the constitution, being abso- 
lutely silent on those subjects, will afford them no protection. 
The Union might thus be reduced from a Union to a unit. Who 
does not see that such conclusions flow from false notions ; that 
the true theory of a republican government is mistaken ; and thai 
in such a government, rights, political and civil, may be qualified 
by the fundamental law, upon such inducements as the freemen 
of the country deem sufficient ? That civil rights may be qualified 
as well as political, is proved by a thousand examples. Minors, 
resident aliens, who are in a course of naturalization — the othei 
sex, whether maids, or wives, or widows, furnish sufficient practi 
cal proofs of this. 

Again — if we are to entertain these hopeful abstractions, and to 
resolve all establishments into their imaginary elements in order to 
recast them upon some Utopian plan, and if it be true that all the 
men in a republican government must help to wield its power, and 



THE MISSOURI QUESTION. 



347 



be equal in rights, I beg leave to ask the honorable gentleman 
from New Hampshire, And why not all the women ? They too 
are God's creatures, and not only very fair, but very rational crea- 
tures ; and our great ancestor, if we are to give credit to Milton, 
accounted them the "wisest, virtuousest, discreetest, best;" although 
to say the truth, he had but one specimen from which to draw his 
conclusion, and possibly if he had had more, would not have 
drawn it at all. They have, moreover, acknowledged civil rights 
in abundance, and upon abstract principles more than their mascu- 
line rulers allow them, in fact. Some monarchies, too, do not 
exclude them from the throne. We have all read of Elizabeth of 
England, of Catharine of Russia, of Semiramis, and Zenobia, and 
a long list of royal and imperial dames, about as good as an equal list 
of royal and imperial lords. Why is it that their exclusion from 
the power of a popular government is not destructive of its republi- 
can character ? 1 do not address this question to the honorable 
gentleman's gallantry, but to his abstraction, and his theories, and 
his notions of the infinite perfectibility of human institutions, bor- 
rowed from Godwin and the turbulent philosophers of France. 
For my own part, sir, if I may have leave to say so much in the 
presence of this mixed uncommon audience, I confess 1 am no 
friend to female government, unless indeed it be that which reposes 
on gentleness, and modesty, and virtue, and feminine grace, and 
delicacy ; and how powerful a government that is, we have all of 
us, as I suspect, at some time or other experienced ! But if the 
ultra republican doctrines which have now been broached should 
ever gain ground among us, I should not be surprised if some ro- 
mantic reformer, treading in the footsteps of Mrs. Wolstonecraft, 
should propose to repeal our republican law salique, and claim for 
our wives and daughters a full participation in political power, and 
to add to it that domestic power, which in some families, as I have 
heard, is as absolute and unrepublican as any power can be. 

I have thus far allowed the honorable gentlemen to avail them- 
selves of their assumption that the constitutional command to 
guaranty to the states a republican form of government, gives 
power to coerce those states in the adjustment of the details of their 
constitutions upon theoretical speculations. But surely it is pass- 
ing strange that any man, who thinks at all, can view this salutary 
command as the grant of a power so monstrous ; or look at it in any 
other light than as a protecting mandate to congress to interpose 
with the force and authority of the Union against that violence and 
usurpation, by which a member of it might otherwise be oppressed 
by profligate and powerful individuals, or ambitious and unprinci- 
pled factions. 

In a word, the resort to this portion of the constitution for an 
argument in favor of the proposed restriction, is one of those ex. 



IMS 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



travagances (I hope I shall not offend by this expression) which 
may excite our admiration, but cannot call for a very rigorous refu- 
tation. I have dealt with it accordingly, and have now done 
with it. 

We are next invited to study that clause of the constitution 
which relates to the migration or importation, before the year 
1 808, of such persons as any of the states then existing should 
think proper to admit. It runs thus : " The migration or importa- 
tion of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think 
proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the congress prior to 
the year one thousand eight hundred and eight; but a tax or du- 
ty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dol- 
lars for each person." 

It is said that this clause empowers congress, after the year 
1808, to prohibit the passage of slaves from state to state, and 
the word " migration " is relied upon for that purpose. 

I will not say that the proof of the existence of a power by a 
clause which, as far as it goes, denies it is always inadmissible ; but 
I will say that it is always feeble. On this occasion, it is singu- 
larly so. The power, in an affirmative shape, cannot be found in 
the constitution; or if it can, it is equivocal and unsatisfactory. 
How do the gentlemen supply this deficiency ? by the aid of a 
negative provision in an article of the constitution in which many 
restrictions are inserted ex abundanti cautela, from which it is 
plainly impossible to infer that the power to which they apply 
would otherwise have existed. Thus — "No bill of attainder or 
ex post facto law shall be passed." Take away the restriction — 
could congress pass a bill of attainder, the trial by jury in criminal 
cases being expressly secured by the constitution ? The inference, 
therefore, from the prohibition in question, whatever may be its 
meaning, to the power which it is supposed to restrain, but which 
you cannot lay your finger upon with any pretensions to certainty, 
must be a very doubtful one. But the import of the prohibition 
is also doubtful, as the gentlemen themselves admit. So that a 
doubtful power is to be made certain by a yet more doubtful neg- 
ative upon power ; or, rather, a doubtful negative, where there is 
uo evidence of the corresponding affirmative, is to make out the 
affirmative, and to justify us in acting upon it, in a matter of such 
high moment, that questionable power should not dare to approach 
it. If the negative were perfectly clear in its import, the conclu- 
sion which has been drawn from it would be rash, because it might 
have proceeded, as some of the negatives in whose company it is 
found evidently did proceed, from great anxiety to prevent such 
assumptions of authority as are now attempted. But when it is 
conceded, that the supposed import of this negative (as to the 
term migration) is ambiguous, and that it may have been used in 



THE MISSOURI QUESTION. 



349 



a very different sense from that which is imputed to it, the conclu- 
sion acquires a character of boldness, which, however some may 
admire, the wise and reflecting will not fail to condemn. 

In the construction of this clause, the first remark that occurs 
is, that the word migration is associated with the word importa- 
tion. I do not insist that noscitur a sociis is as good a rule in 
matters of interpretation as in common life ; but it is, nevertheless, 
of considerable weight when the associated words are not qualified 
by any phrases that disturb the effect of their fellowship ; and un- 
less it announces (as in this case it does not) by specific phrases 
combined with the associated term, a different intention. More- 
over, the ordinary unrestricted import of the word migration is 
what I have here supposed. A removal from district to district, 
within the same jurisdiction, is never denominated a migration of 
persons. I will concede to the honorable gentlemen, if they will 
accept the concession, that ants may be said to migrate when they 
go from one ant-hill to another at no great distance from it. But 
even then they could not be said to migrate, if each ant-hill was 
their home in virtue of some federal compact with insects like 
themselves. But, however this may be, it should seem to be cer- 
tain that human beings do not migrate, in the sense of a constitu- 
tion, simply because they transplant themselves from one place, 
to which that constitution extends, to another which it equally 
covers. 

If this word migration applied to freemen, and not to slaves, it 
would be clear that removal from state to state would not be com- 
prehended within it. Why, then, if you choose to apply it to 
slaves, does it take another meaning as to the place from whence 
they are to come ? 

Sir, if we once depart from the usual acceptation of this term, 
fortified as it is by its union with another in which there is nothing 
in this respect equivocal, will gentlemen please to intimate the 
point at which we are to stop? Migration means, as they con- 
tend, a removal from state to state, within the pale of the com- 
mon government. Why not a removal also from county to county, 
within a particular state — from plantation to plantation — from farm 
to farm — from hovel to hovel ? Why not any exertion of the 
power of locomotion ? I protest I do not see, if this arbitrary lim- 
itation of the natural sense of the term migration be warrantable, 
that a person to whom it applies may not be compelled to remain 
immovable all the days of his life (which could not well be many) 
in the very spot, literally speaking, in which it was his good or his 
bad fortune to be born. 

Whatever may be the latitude in which the word " persons " 
is capable of being received, it is not denied that the word " im- 
portation " indicates a bringing in from a jurisdiction foreign to the 
30 



350 



MR. PINKNEY'S SPEECH ON 



United States. The two termini of the importation, here spoken 
of, are a foreign country and the American Union ; the first the 
terminus a quo, the second the terminus ad quern. The word m?'- 
gration stands in simple connection with it, and of course is left to 
the full influence of that connection. The natural conclusion is, 
that the same termini belong to each, or, in other words, that if 
the importation must be abroad, so also must be the migration; 
no other termini being assigned to the one which are not manifest- 
ly characteristic of the other. This conclusion is so obvious, that 
to repel it, the word migration requires, as an appendage, explan- 
atory phraseology, giving to rt a different beginning from that of 
importation. To justify the conclusion that it was intended to 
mean a removal from state to state, each within the sphere of tjie 
constitution in which it is used, the addition of the words from one 
to another state in this Union, were indispensable. By the omis- 
sion of these words, the word " migration " is compelled to take 
every sense of which it is fairly susceptible from its immediate 
neighbor "importation." In this view it means a coming, as 
" importation " means a bringing, from a foreign jurisdiction into 
the United States. That it is susceptible of this meaning, nobody 
doubts. I go further. It can have no other meaning in the place 
in which it is found. It is found in the constitution of this Union; 
which, when it speaks of migration as of a general concern, must 
be supposed to have in view a migration into the domain which 
itself embraces as a general government. 

Migration, then, even if it comprehends slaves, does not mean 
the removal of them from state to state, but means the coming of 
slaves from places beyond their limits and their power. And if 
this be so, the gentlemen gain nothing for their argument by show- 
ing that slaves were the objects of this term. 

An honorable gentleman from Rhode Island,* whose speech 
was distinguished for its ability, and for an admirable force of rea- 
soning, as well as by the moderation and mildness of its spirit, in- 
formed us, with less discretion than in general he exhibited, that 
the word " migration " was introduced into this clause at the in- 
stance of some of the southern states, who wished by its instru- 
mentality to guard against a prohibition by congress of the passage 
into those states of slaves from other states. He has given us no 
authority for this supposition, and it is, therefore, a gratuitous one. 
How improbable it is, a moment's reflection will convince him. 
The African slave-trade being open during the whole of the time 
to which the entire clause in question referred, such a purpose 
could scarcely be entertained; but if it had been entertained, and 
there was believed to be a necessity for securing it, by a restriction 



* Mr. Burrill. 



THE MISSOURI QUESTION. 



351 



upon the power of congress to interfere with it, is it possible that 
they who deemed it important would have contented themselves 
with a vague restraint, which was calculated to operate in almost 
any other manner than that which they desired ? If fear and jeal- 
ousy, such as the honorable gentleman has described, had dictated 
this provision, a better term than that of " migration," simple and 
unqualified, and joined too with the word " importation," would 
have been found to tranquillize those fears and satisfy that jealousy. 
Fear and jealousy are watchful, and are rarely seen to accept a 
security short of their object, and less rarely to shape that security 
of their own accord, in such a way as to make it no security at 
all. They always seek an explicit guaranty ; and that this is not 
such a guaranty this debate has proved, if it has proved nothing 
else. 

Sir, I shall not be understood by what I have said to admit 
that the word migration refers to slaves. I have contended only 
that if it does refer to slaves, it is in this clause synonymous with 
importation ; and that it cannot mean the mere passage of slaves, 
with or without their masters, from one state in the Union to an- 
other. 

But I now deny that it refers to slaves at all. I am not for any 
man's opinions or his histories upon this subject. I am not accus- 
tomed jurare in verba magistri. I shall take the clause as I find 
it, and do my best to interpret it. 

JJ» At* AA, J7. 

•7T *A" TV* TT -TV* •7Y* -JF 

[After going through with that part of his argument relating to 
this clause of the constitution, Mr. Pinkney concluded his speech 
by expressing a hope that (what he deemed) the perilous prin- 
ciples urged by those in favor of the restriction upon the new 
state would be disavowed or explained, or that at ail events the 
application of them to the subject under discussion would not be 
pressed, but that it might be disposed of in a manner satisfactory 
to all by a prospective prohibition of slavery in the territory to the 
north and west of Missouri.] 



352 



SPEECH JOHN RANDOLPH 

ON 

THE TAR'lFF BII*L, 

DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE 
UNITED STATES, APRIL 15, 1824. 



I am, Mr. Speaker, practising no deception upon myself, much 
less upon the house, when I say, that if 1 had consulted my own 
feelings and' inclinations, 1 should not have troubled the house, 
exhausted as it is, and as I am, with any further remarks upon this 
subject. I come to the discharge of this task, not merely with re- 
luctance, but with disgust ; jaded, worn down, abraded, I may say, 
as I am by long attendance upon this body, and continued stretch 
of the attention upon this subject. I come to it, however, at the 
suggestion, and in pursuance of the wishes of those, whose wishes 
are to me, in all matters touching my public duty, paramount law ; 
1 speak with those reservations, of course, which every moral 
agent must be supposed to make to himself. 

It was not more to my surprise, than to my disappointment, that 
on my return to the house, after a necessary absence of a few 
days, on indispensable business, I found it engaged in discussing 
the general principle of the bill, when its details were under con- 
sideration. If I had expected such a turn in the debate, I would, 
at any private sacrifice, however great, have remained a spectator 
and auditor of that discussion. With the exception of the speech, 
already published, of my worthy colleague on my right (Mr. P. 
P. Barbour), I have been nearly deprived of the benefit of the dis- 
cussion which has taken place. Many weeks have been occupied 
with this bill (I hope the house will pardon me for saying so) be 
fore I took the slightest part in the deliberations of the details ; and 
I now sincerely regret that I had not firmness enough to adhere to 
the resolution which I had laid down to myself, in the early stage 
of the debate, not to take any part in the discussion of the details 
of the measure. But, as I trust, what I now have to say upon this 
subject, although more and better things have been said by others, 
may not be the same that they have said, or may not be said in 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH, &c. 



353 



the same manner. I here borrow the language of a man who has 
been heretofore conspicuous in the councils of the country ; of 
one who was unrivalled for readiness and dexterity in debate ; who 
was long without an equal on the floor of this body ; who contrib- 
uted as much to the revolution of 1801, as any man in this na- 
tion, and derived as little benefit from it; as, to use the words of 
that celebrated man, what T have to say is not that which has been 
said by others, and will not be said in their manner, the house will, 
I trust, have patience with me during the time that my strength 
will allow me to occupy their attention. And I beg them to un- 
derstand, that the notes which I hold in my hand are not the notes 
on which I mean to speak, but of what others have spoken, and 
from which I will make the smallest selection in my power. 

Here permit me to say, that I am obliged, and with great re- 
luctance, to differ from my worthy colleague, who has taken so 
conspicuous a part in this debate, about one fact, which I will call 
to his recollection, for I am sure it was in his memory, though 
sleeping. He has undertaken to state the causes by which the 
difference in the relative condition of various parts of the Union 
has been produced ; but my worthy colleague has omitted to state 
the primum mobile of the commerce and manufactures to which a 
portion of the country, that I need not name, owes its present pros- 
perity and wealth. That primum mobile was southern capital. 
I speak not now of transactions quorum pars minima fui, but of 
things of which, nevertheless, I have a contemporaneous recollec- 
tion. T say, without the fear of contradiction, then, that in conse- 
quence of the enormous depreciation of the evidences of the pub- 
lic debt of this country — the debt proper of the United States (to 
which must be added an item of not less than twenty millions of 
dollars, for the state debts assumed by the United States) being 
bought up and almost engrossed by the people of what were then 
called the Northern States — a measure which nobody dreamt any 
thing about, of which nobody had the slightest suspicion — I mean 
the assumption of the state debts by the federal government — 
these debts being bought up for a mere song, a capital of eighty 
millions of dollars, or, in other words, a credit to that amount, 
bearing an interest of six per cent, per annum (with the exception 
of nineteen millions, the interest of that debt, which bore an inter- 
est of three per cent.) — a capital of eighty millions of dollars was 
poured, in a single day, into the coffers of the north ; and to thai 
cause we may mainly ascribe the difference, so disastrous to the 
south, between that country and the other portion of this Union, to 
which I have alluded. When we, roused by the sufferings of our 
brethren of Boston, entered into the contest with the mother coun- 
try, and when we came out of it — when this constitution was 
adopted, ive were comparatively rich ; they were positively poor 
30* Y y 



354 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH 



What is now our relative situation? They are flourishing and 
rich : we are tributary to them, not only through the medium of 
the public debt of which I have spoken, but also through the me- 
dium of the pension list, nearly the whole amount of which is dis- 
bursed in the Eastern States — and to this creation of a day is to 
be ascribed the difference of our relative situation (I hope my 
worthy colleague will not consider any thing that I say as conflict- 
ing with his general principles, to which 1 heartily subscribe). 
Yes, sir, and the price paid for the creation of all that portion of 
this capital, which consisted of the assumed debts of the states, 
was the immense boon of fixing the seat of government where it 
now is. And I advert to this bargain, because I wish to show to 
every member of this house, and, if it were possible, to every 
individual of this nation, the most tremendous and calamitous re- 
sults of political bargaining. 

Sir, when are we to have enough of this tariff question ? In 
18I6 it was supposed to be settled. Only three years thereafter, 
another proposition for increasing it was sent from this house to 
the senate, baited with a tax of four cents per pound on brown 
sugar. It was fortunately rejected in that body. In what manner 
this bill is baited, it does not become me to say; but I have too 
distinct a recollection of the vote in committee of the whole, on 
the duty upon molasses, and afterwards of the vote in the house 
on the same question ; of the votes of more than one of the states 
on that question, not to mark it well. I do not say that the change 
of the vote on that question was affected by any man's voting 
against his own motion ; but I do not hesitate to say that it 
was effected by one man's electioneering against his own motion. 
I am very glad, Mr. Speaker, that old Massachusetts Bay, and the 
province of Maine and Sagadahock, by whom we stood in the 
days of the revolution, now stand by the south, and will not aid in 
fixing on us this system of taxation, compared with which the tax- 
ation of Mr. Grenville and lord North was as nothing. I speak 
with knowledge of what I say, when I declare, that this bill is an 
attempt to reduce the country, south of Mason and Dixon's line 
and east of the Alleghany mountains, to a state of worse than co- 
lonial bondage ; a state to which the domination of Great Britain 
was, in my judgment, far preferable; and I trust I shall always 
have the fearless integrity to utter any political sentiment which 
the head sanctions and the heart ratifies ; for the British parliament 
never would have dared to lay such duties on our imports, or 
their exports to us, either " at home " or here, as is now proposed 
to be laid upon the imports from abroad. At that time we had the 
command of the market of the vast dominions then subject, and 
we should have had those which have since been subjected, to the 
British empire j we enjoyed a free trade eminently superior to 



ON THE TARIFF BILL. 



355 



any thing that we can enjoy, if this bill shall go into operation. 
It is a sacrifice of the interests of a part of this nation to the ideal 
benefit of the rest. It marks us out as the victims of a worse 
than Egyptian bondage. It is a barter of so much of our rights, 
of so much of the fruits of our labor, for political power to be 
transferred to other hands. It ought to be met, and I trust it will 
be met, in the southern country, as was the stamp act, and by all 
those measures, which I will not detain the house by recapitula- 
ting, which succeeded the stamp act, and produced the final breach 
with the. mother country, which it took about ten years to bring 
about, as I trust, in my conscience, it will not take as long to 
bring about similar results from this measure, should it become 
a law. 

All policy is very suspicious, says an eminent statesman, that 
sacrifices the interest of any part of a community to the ideal 
good of the whole; and those governments only are tolerable, 
where, by the necessary construction of the political machine, the 
interests of all the parts are obliged to be protected by it. Here 
is a district of country extending from the Patapsco to the gulf 
of Mexico, from the Alleghany to the Atlantic ; a district, which, 
taking in all that part of Maryland lying south of the Patapsco 
and east of Elk river, raises five sixths ' of all the exports of 
this country, that are of home growth. I have in my hand the 
official statements which prove it, but which I will not weary the 
house by reading — in all this country — yes, sir, and I bless God 
for it ; for with all the fantastical and preposterous theories about 
the rights of man (the theories, not the rights themselves, I speak 
of), there is nothing but power that can restrain power. I bless 
God, that, in this insulted, oppressed, and outraged region, we are, 
as to our counsels in regard to this measure, but as one man ; that 
there exists on the subject but one feeling and one interest. We 
are proscribed and put to the bar; and if we do not feel, and, feel- 
ing, do not act, we are bastards to those fathers who achieved 
the revolution : then shall we deserve to make our bricks without 
straw. There is no case on record, in which a proposition like 
this, suddenly changing the whole frame of a country's polity, tear- 
ing asunder every ligature of the body politic, was ever carried by 
a lean majority of two or three votes, unless it be the usurpation 
of the septennial act, which passed the British parliament, by, 
I think, a majority of one vote, the same that laid the tax on cot- 
ton bagging. I do not stop here, sir, to argue about the consti- 
tutionality of this bill ; I consider the constitution a dead letter . 
I consider it to consist, at this time, of the power of the general 
government and the power of the states : that is the constitution. 
You may entrench yourself in parchment to the teeth, says lord 
Chatham, the sword will find its way to the vitals of the constitu 



356 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH 



tion. I have no faith in parchment, sir ; I have no faith in the 
abracadabra of the constitution ; I have no faith in it. I have 
faith in the power of that commonwealth, of which I am an un- 
worthy son ; in the power of those Carolinas, and of that Geor- 
gia, in her ancient and utmost extent, to the Mississippi, which 
went with us through the valley of the shadow of death, in the 
war of our independence. I have said, that I shall not stop to 
discuss the constitutionality of this question, for that reason and 
for a better; that there never was a constitution under the sun, in 
which, by an unwise exercise of the powers of the government, the 
people may not be driven to the extremity of resistance by force. 
" For it is not, perhaps, so much by the assumption of unlawful 
powers, as by the unwise or unwarrantable use of those which 
are most legal, that governments oppose their true end and ob- 
ject ; for there is such a thing as tyranny as well as usurpation." 
If, under a power to regulate trade, you prevent exportation ; if, 
with the most approved spring lancets, you draw the last drop of 
blood from our veins ; if, secundum art em, you draw the last shil- 
ling from our pockets, what are the checks of the constitution to 
us ? A fig for the constitution ! When the scorpion's sting is 
probing us to the quick, shall we stop to chop logic ? Shall we 
get some learned and cunning clerk to say whether the power to 
do this is to be found in the constitution, and then, if he, from what- 
ever motive, shall maintain the affirmative, like the animal whose 
fleece forms so material a portion of this bill, quietly lie down and^ 
be shorn ? 

Sir, events now passing elsewhere, which plant a thorn in my 
pillow and a dagger in my heart, admonish me of the difficulty of 
governing with sobriety any people who are over head and ears 
in debt. That state of things begets a temper which sets at nought 
every thing like reason and common sense. This country is 
unquestionably laboring under great distress ; but we cannot legis- 
late it out of that distress. We may, by your legislation, reduce 
all the country south and east of Mason and Dixon's line, the 
whites as well as the blacks, to the condition of Helots : you can 
do no more. We have had placed before us, in the course of this 
discussion, foreign examples and authorities ; and among other 
things, we have been told as an argument in favor of this measure, 
of the prosperity of Great Britain. Have gentlemen taken into 
consideration the peculiar advantages of Great Britain ? Have 
they taken into consideration that, not excepting Mexico, and that 
fine country which lies between the Orinoco and Caribbean sea, 
England is decidedly superior, in point of physical advantages, to 
every country under the sun ? This is unquestionably true. I 
will enumerate some of those advantages. First, there is her 
climate. In England, such is the temperature of the air, that a 



ON THE TARIFF BILL. 



357 



man can there do more days' work in the year, and more hours' 
work in the day, than in any other climate in the world; of 
course I include Scotland and Ireland in this description. It is in 
such a climate only, that the human animal can bear without extir- 
pation the corrupted air, the noisome exhalations, the incessant 
labor of these accursed manufactories. Yes, sir, accursed ; for I 
say it is an accursed thing, which I will neither taste, nor touch, 
nor handle. If we were to act here on the English system, we 
should have the yellow fever at Philadelphia and New York, not 
in August merely, but from June to January, and from January to 
June. The climate of this country alone, were there no other 
natural obstacle to it, says aloud, You shall not manufacture ! 
Even our tobacco factories, admitted to be the most wholesome of 
any sort of factories, are known to be, where extensive, the very 
nidus (if I may use the expression) of yellow fever and other 
fevers of similar type. In another of the advantages of Great 
Britain, so important to her prosperity, we are almost on a par 
with her, if we know how properly to use it. Fortunatos nimium 
sua si bona norint — for, as regards defence, we are, to all intents 
and purposes, almost as much an island as England herself. But 
one. of her insular advantages we can never acquire. Every part 
of that country is accessible from the sea. There, as you recede 
from the sea, you do not get further from the sea. I know that a 
great deal will be said of our majestic rivers, about the father of 
floods, and his tributary streams ; but, with the Ohio, frozen up 
all the winter and dry all the summer, with a long, tortuous, diffi- 
cult, and dangerous navigation thence to the ocean, the gentlemen 
of the west may rest assured that they will never derive one 
particle of advantage from even a total prohibition of foreign man- 
ufactures. You may succeed in reducing us to your own level of 
misery ; but if we were to agree to become your slaves, you nevei 
can derive one farthing of advantage from this bill. What parts 
of this country can derive any advantage from it ? Those parts 
only, where there is a water power in immediate contact with 
navigation, such as the vicinities of Boston, Providence, Baltimore, 
and Richmond. Petersburg is the last of these as you travel 
south. You take a bag of cotton up the river to Pittsburg, or to 
Zanesville, to have it manufactured and sent down to New Orleans 
for a market, and before your bag of cotton has got to the place of 
manufacture, the manufacturer of Providence has received his 
returns for the goods made from his bag of cotton purchased at the 
same time that you purchased yours. No, sir, gentlemen may as 
well insist that because the Chesapeake bay, mare nostrum, our 
Mediterranean sea, gives us every advantage of navigation, we shall 
exclude from it every thing but steam-boats and those boats called 
xar' ifc%*>, per e.nphasin, par excellence, Kentucky boats — a son 



35b 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH 



of huge square, clumsy, wooden box. And why not insist upon 
it ? Hav'nt you " the power to regulate commerce" ? Would not 
that too be a ."regulation of commerce"? It would, indeed, 
and a pretty regulation it is ; and so is this bill. And, sir, I mar- 
vel that the representation from the great commercial state of New 
York should be in favor of this bill. If operative — and if inopera- 
tive why talk of it ? — if operative, it must, like the embargo of 
1807 — 1809, transfer no small portion of the wealth of the Lon- 
don of America, as New York has been called, to Quebec and 
Montreal. She will receive the most of her imports from abroad, 
down the river. 2 I do not know any bill that could be better cal- 
culated for Vermont than this bill ; because, through Vermont, 
from Quebec, Montreal, and other positions on the St. Lawrence, 
we are, if it passes, unquestionably to receive our supplies of for- 
eign goods. It will, no doubt, suit the Niagara frontier. 

But, sir, I must not suffer myself to be led too far astray from 
the topic of the peculiar advantages of England as a manufacturing 
country. Her vast beds of coal are inexhaustible ; there are 
daily discoveries of quantities of it, greater than ages past have yet 
consumed ; to which beds of coal her manufacturing establishments 
have been transferred, as any man may see who will compare the 
present population of her towns with what it was formerly. It is 
to these beds of coal that Birmingham, Manchester, Wolverhamp- 
ton, Sheffield, Leeds, and other manufacturing towns, owe their 
growth. If you could destroy her coal in one day, you would cut 
at once the sinews of her power. Then, there are her metals, 
and particularly tin, of which she has the exclusive monopoly. 
Tin, I know, is to be found in Japan, and perhaps elsewhere ; but, 
in practice, England has now the monopoly of that article. I 
might go further, and I might say, that England possesses an 
advantage, quoad hoc, in her institutions ; for there men are com- 
pelled to pay their debts. But, here, men are not only not. 
compelled to pay their debts, but they are protected in the refusal 
to pay them, in the scandalous evasion of their legal obligations ; 
and, after being convicted of embezzling the public money, and 
the money of others, of which they were appointed guardians and 
trustees, they have the impudence to obtrude their unblushing 
fronts into society, and elbow honest men out of their way. 
There, though all men are on a footing of equality on the high 
way, and in the courts of law, at will and at market, yet the 
castes in Hindoostan are not more distinctly separated, one from 
the other, than the different classes of society are in England. It 
is true that it is practicable for a wealthy merchant or a man- 
ufacturer, or his descendants, after having, through two or three 
generations, washed out, what is considered the stain of their 
original occupation, to emerge, by slow degrees, into the higher 



ON THE TARIFF BILL. 



359 



ranks of society ; but this rarely happens. Can you find men of 
vast fortune, in this country, content to move in the lower circles — 
content as the ox under the daily drudgery of the yoke ? It is 
true that, in England, some of these wealthy people take it into 
their heads to buy seats in parliament. But, when they get there, 
unless they possess great talents, they are mere nonentities ; their 
existence is only to be found in the red book which contains a list 
of the members of parliament. Now, sir, I wish to know if, in the 
western country, where any man may get beastly drunk for three 
pence sterling — in England, you cannot get a small wine-glass of 
spirits under twenty-five cents ; one such drink of grog as I have 
seen swallowed in this country, would there cost a dollar — in the 
western country, where every man can get as much meat and 
bread as he can consume, and yet spend the best part of his days, 
and nights too, perhaps, on the tavern benches, or loitering at the 
cross roads asking the news, can you expect the people of such a 
country, with countless millions of wild land and wild animals be- 
sides, can be cooped up in manufacturing establishments, and 
made to work sixteen hours a day, under the superintendence of a 
driver, yes, a driver, compared with whom a southern overseer is 
a gentleman and man of refinement ; for, if they do not work, 
these work people in the manufactories, they cannot eat ; and, 
among all the punishments that can be devised (put death even 
among the number), I defy you to get as much work out of a man 
by any of them, as when he knows that he must work before he 
can eat. 

But, sir, if we follow the example of England in one respect, as 
we are invited to do, we must also follow it in another. If we 
adopt her policy, we must adopt her institutions also. Her policy 
is the result of her institutions, and our institutions must be the 
result of our policy, assimilated to hers. We cannot adopt such 
an exterior system as that of England, without adopting also her 
interior policy. We have heard of her wealth, her greatness, her 
glory ; but her eulogist is silent about the poverty, wretchedness, 
misery of the lowest orders. Show me the country, say gentlemen, 
which has risen to glory without this system of bounties and pro 
tection on manufactures. Sir, show me any country, beyond our 
own, which has risen to glory or to greatness, without an established 
church, or without a powerful aristocracy, if not an hereditary 
nobility. I know no country in Europe, except Turkey, without 
hereditary nobles. Must we, too, have these Corinthian ornaments 
of society, because those countries of greatness and glory have 
siven it to them? But, after we shall have destroyed all our 
foreign trade ; after we shall have, by the prevention of imports, 
cut off exports — thus keeping the promise of the constitution to 
the ear, and breaking it to the hope — paltering with the people in 



360 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH 



a double sense — after we shall have done this, we are told " we 
shall only have to resort to an excise; we have only to change the 
mode of collection of taxes from the people ; both modes of taxa- 
tion are voluntary." Very voluntary ! The exciseman comes 
into my house, searches my premises, respects not even the privacy 
of female apartments, measures, gauges, and weighs every thing, 
levies a tax upon every thing, and then tells me the tax is a vol- 
untary one on my part, and that I am, or ought to be, content. 
Yes, voluntary, as Portia said to Shylock, when she played the 
judge so rarely — Art thou content, Jew ? Art thou content ? 

These taxes, however, it seems, are voluntary, " as being alto 
gether upon consumption." By a recent speech on this subject, 
the greater part of which I was so fortunate as to hear, I learn that 
there have been only two hundred capital prosecutions in England, 
within a given time, for violations of the revenue laws. Are we 
ready, if one of us, too poor to own a saddle-horse, should borrow 
a saddle, and clap it on his plough-horse, to ride to church or court, 
or mill or market, to be taxed for a surplus saddle-horse, and sur- 
charged for having failed to list him as such ? Are gentlemen 
aware of the inquisitorial, dispensing, arbitrary, and almost papal 
power of the commissioners of excise ? I shall not stop to go into 
a detail of them ; but I never did expect to hear it said, on this 
floor, and by a gentleman from Kentucky too, that the excise 
system was a mere scare-crow, a bug-bear ; that the sound of the 
words constituted all the difference between a system of excise 
and a system of customs; that both meant the same thing: — 
" Write them together ; yours is as fair a name : sound them ; it 
doth become the mouth as well : " here, sir, I must beg leave to 
differ ; I do not think it does : " Weigh them ; it is as heavy : " 
that I grant — conjure with them ; " — excise "will start a spirit as 
soon as" customs. This I verily believe, sir, and I wish, with all 
my heart, if this bill is to pass, if new and unnecessary burdens 
are to be wantonly imposed upon the people, that we were to 
return home with the blessed news of a tax or excise, not less by 
way of " minimum " than fifty cents per gallon upon whisky. 
And here, if I did not consider an exciseman to bear, according to 
the language of the old law books, caput lupinum, and that it was 
almost as meritorious to shoot such a hell-hound of tyranny, as to 
shoot a wolf or a mad dog ; and if I did not know that any thing 
like an excise in this country is in effect utterly impracticable, — I 
myself, feeling, seeing, blushing for my country, would gladly vote 
to lay an excise on this abominable liquor, the lavish consumption 
of which renders this the most drunken nation under the sun ; and 
yet we have refused to take the duties from wines, from cheap 
Piench wines particularly, that might lure the dog from his vomit, 
and lay the foundation of a reformation of the public manners. Sir, 



ON THE TARIFF BILL. 



361 



an excise system can never be maintained in this country. I had 
as lief be a tithe proctor in Ireland, and met on a dark night in 
a narrow road by a dozen white-boys, or peep-of-day boys, or 
hearts of oak, or hearts of steel, as an excise man in the Alleghany 
mountains, met, in a lonely road, or by-place, by a backwoodsman, 
with a rifle in his hand. With regard to Ireland, the British 
chancellor of the exchequer has been obliged to reduce the excise 
in Ireland on distilled spirits, to comparatively nothing to what it 
was formerly, in consequence of the impossibility of collecting it in 
that country. Ireland is, not to speak with statistical accuracy, 
about the size of Pennsylvania, containing something like twenty- 
five thousand square miles of territory, with a population of six 
millions of inhabitants, nearly as great a number as the whole of 
the white population of the United States ; with a standing army 
of 20,000 men ; with another standing army, composed of all 
those classes in civil life, who, through the instrumentality of that 
army, keep the wretched people in subjection : under all these 
circumstances, even in Ireland, the excise cannot be collected. I 
venture to say that no army that the earth has ever seen ; not such 
a one as that of Bonaparte, which marched to the invasion of 
Russia, would be capable of collecting an excise in this country ; 
not such a one (if you will allow me to give some delightful 
poetry in exchange for very wretched prose) as Milton has 
described — 

" Such forces met not, nor so wide a camp, 
When Agrican, with all his northern powers 
Besieged Albracca, as romances tell, 
The city of Calliphrone, from whence to win 
The fairest of her sex, Angelica, 
His daughter, sought by many prowest knights, 
Both Paynim and the peers of Charlemagne ; " 

not such a force, nor even the troops with which he compares 
them, which were no less than " the legend fiends of hell " could 
collect an excise here. If any officer of our government, were to 
take the field a still-hunting, as they call it in Ireland, among our 
southern or western forests and mountains, I should like to see the 
throwing off of the ho.unds. I have still so much of the sportsman 
about me, that I should like to see the breaking cover, and, above 
all, I should like to be in at the death. 

And what are we now about to do ? For what was the constitu- 
tion formed ? To drive the people of any part of this Union from 
the plough to the distaff? Sir, the constitution of the United States 
never would have been formed, and if formed, would have been 
scouted, una voce, by the people, if viewed as a means for effect- 
ing purposes like this. The constitution was formed for external 
purposes, to raise armies and navies, and to lay uniform duties ou 
31 Zz 



362 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH 



imports, to raise a revenue to defray the expenditure for such 
objects. What are you going to do now ? To turn the constitu- 
tion wrong side out ; to abandon foreign commerce and exterior 
relations — I am sorry to use this Frenchified word — the foreign 
affairs, which it was established to regulate, and convert it into a 
municipal agent, to carry a system of espionage and excise into 
every log-house in the United States. We went to war with 
Great Britain for free trade and sailors' rights ; we made a treaty 
of peace, in which I never could, with the aid of my glasses, see a 
word about either the one or the other of these objects of conten 
tion : w T e are now determined never to be engaged in another for 
such purposes ; for we are, ourselves, putting an end to them. 
And, by the way of comfort, in this state of things, we have been 
told, by the doctor as well as the apothecary, that much cannot be 
immediately expected from this new scheme ; that years will pass 
away before its beneficial effects will be fully realized. And to 
whom is this told ? To the consumptive patient it is said, Here is 
the remedy; persevere in it for a few years, and it will infallibly 
cure your disorder ; and this infallible remedy is prescribed for 
pulmonary consumption, which is an opprobrium of physicians, 
and has reached a stage, that, in a few months, not to say days, 
must inevitably terminate the existence of the patient. This is to 
be done, too, on the plea that the people who call for this measure 
are already ruined. I will do any thing, sir, in reason, to relieve 
these persons ; but I can never agree, because they are ruined, 
and we are half ruined only, that we shall be entirely ruined, for 
the contingent possibility of their relief. We have no belief in 
this new theory ; new, for it came in with the French revolution, 
and that is of modern date — of the transfusion of blood from a 
healthy animal to a sick one ; and if there is to be such a transfu- 
sion for the benefit of these ruined persons now, we refer the 
gentlemen to bulls and goats for supplies of blood, for we should 
be the veriest asses to permit them to draw our own. 

We are told, however, that we have nothing to do but to post- 
pone the payment of the public debt for a few years, and wait, for 
an accumulation of wealth, for a new run of luck, 

"Rusticus expectat dum defluat amnis, atille 
Labitur, et labetur in omne volubilis Eevura." 

This postponement of the public debt is no novelty. All debts are, 
now-a-days, as old Lilly hath it, in the future in rus, " about to 
be " paid. We have gone on postponing paying the national debt, 
and our own debts, until individual credit is at an end ; until 
property, low as it is reduced in price by our fantastic legislation, 
Vi b no longer be bought but for ready money. Here is one, and 



* 



O:; THE TARIFF BILL. 



363 



there the other. I am describing a state of society which I know 
to exist in a part of the country, and which I hear, with concern, 
does exist in a greater degree, in a much larger portion of the 
country than I pretend to be personally acquainted with. 

In all beneficial changes in the natural world— and the senti- 
ment is illustrated by one of the most beautiful effusions of imagi- 
nation and genius that I ever read — in all those changes, which 
are the work of an all-wise, all-seeing, and superintending Provi- 
dence, as in the insensible gradation by which the infant bud ex- 
pands into manhood, and from manhood to senility ; or, if you 
will, to caducity itself, — you find nature never working but by 
gradual and imperceptible changes ; you cannot see the object 
move, but take your eye from it for a while, and, like the index 
of that clock, you can see that it has moved. The old proverb 
says, God works good, and always by degrees. The devil, on the 
other hand, is bent on mischief, and always in a hurry. He can- 
not stay : his object is mischief, which can best be effected sud- 
denly, and he must be gone to work elsewhere. But we have 
the comfort, under the pressure of this measure, that at least no 
force is exercised upon us ; we are not obliged to buy goods of 
foreign manufacture. It is true, sir, that gentlemen have not said 
you shall not send your tobacco or cotton abroad ; but they have 
said the same thing in other words ; by preventing the importation 
of the returns which we used to receive, and without which the 
sale or exchange of our produce is impracticable, they say to us, 
You shall sell only to us, and we will give you what we please , 
you shall buy only of us, but at what price we please to ask. 
But no force is used ! You are at full liberty not to buy or to 
sell. Sir, when an English judge once told a certain curate of 
Brentford, that the court of chancery was open equally to the 
rich and the poor, Home Tooke replied, " So, my lord, is the 
London tavern." You show a blanket or a warm rug to a 
wretch that is shivering with cold, and tell him, You shall get one 
no where else, but you are at liberty not to buy mine. 

No Jew, who ever tampered with the necessities of a profligate 
young heir, lending him money at a usury of cent, per cent., 
ever acted more paternally than the advocates of this bill, to those 
upon whom it is to operate. I advise you, young man, for your 
good, says the usurer. I do these things very reluctantly, says 
Moses — these courses will lead you to ruin. But, no force, — no, 
sir, no force, short of Russian despotism, shall induce me to pur- 
chase, or, knowing it, to use any article from the region of country 
which attempts to cram this bill down our throats. On this, we 
of the south are as resolved as were our fathers about the tea, 
which they refused to drink ; for this is the same old question of 
the stamp act in a new shape, viz. whether they, who have no 



364 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH 



common feeling with us, shall impose on us, not merely a burden- 
some but a ruinous tax, and that by way of experiment and sport. 
And'l say again, if we are to submit to such usurpations, give me 
George Grenville, give me lord North for a master. It is in this 
point of view that I most deprecate the bill. If, from the .lan- 
guage I have used, any gentleman shall believe I am not as much 
attached to this Union as 'any one on this floor, he will labor under 
a great mistake. But there is no magic in this word union. I 
value it as the means of preserving the liberty and happiness of 
the people. Marriage itself is a good thing, but the marriages of 
Mezentius were not so -esteemed. The marriage of Sinbad, the 
Sailor, with the corpse of his deceased wife, was a union ; and 
just such a union will this be, if, by a bare majority in both 
houses, this bill shall become a law. And, I ask, sir, whether it 
will redound to the honor of this house, if this bill should pass, 
that the people should owe their escape to the act of any others 
rather than to us? Shall we, when even the British parliament are 
taking off taxes by wholesale — when all the assessed taxes are di- 
minished fifty per cent. — when the tax on salt is reduced seven 
eighths, with a pledge that the remainder shall come off, and the 
whole would have been repealed, but that it was kept as a salvo 
for the wounded pride of Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, who, 
when asked — Why keep on this odious tax, which brings but a 
paltry hundred and fifty thousand per annum ? answered by sub- 
terfuge and evasion, as I have heard done in this house, and drew 
back upon his resources, his majority — how will it answer for the 
people to have to look up for their escape from oppression, not to 
their immediate representatives, but to the representatives of the 
states, or, possibly, to the executive ? And, permit me here to 
say, and I say it freely, because it is true, that I join as heartily as 
any man, in reprehending " the cold, ambiguous support of the ex- 
ecutive government to this bill." I do not use my own words ; I 
deprecate as much as any member of this house can do, that the 
executive of this country should lend to this bill, or to any other 
bill, a cold and ambiguous support, or support of any sort, until it 
comes before him in the shape of a law, unless it be a measure 
which he, in his constitutional capacity, may have invited congress 
to pass. I may be permitted to say, and I will say, that, in case 
this bill should be unhappily presented to him for his signature,— 
and as an allusion has been made to him in debate, I presume I may 
repeat it, — I hope he will recollect how much the country that gave 
him birth has done for him, and the little, not to say, worse than 
nothing, that, during his administration, he has done for her. I 
hope, sir, he will scout the bill, as contrary to the genius of our gov- 
ernment, to the whole spirit and letter of our confederation — I say 
of our confederation — Blessed be God, it is a confederation, and 



ON THE TARIFF BILL. 



365 



that it contains within itself the redeeming powei which has more 
than once been exercised-— and that it contains within itself the 
seeds of preservation, if not of this Union, at least of the indi- 
vidual commonwealths of which it is composed. 

But, sir, not satisfied with an appeal to the example of Great 
Britaib, whom we have been content hitherto very sedulously to 
censure and to imitate, — as I once heard a certain person say that 
it was absolutely necessary for persons of a peculiar character to 
be extremely vehement of censure of the very vice of which they 
are themselves guilty — the example of Russia has been introduced, 
the very last, I should suppose, that would be brought into this 
house on this or any other question. A gentleman from South 
Carolina '(Mr. Poinsett), whose intelligence and information I very 
much respect, but the feebleness of whose voice does not permit 
him to be heard as distinctly as could be wished, remarked the 
other day, and having it on my notes, I will, with his leave, repeat 
it — " Russia is cursed with a paper money, which, in point of de- 
preciation and its consequent embarrassment to her, can boast of no 
advantage, I believe, even over that of Kentucky — so cursed, that 
it is impossible, until her circulation is restored to a healthful state, 
she can ever take her station as a commercial or manufacturing 
nation, to any extent." Nay, more, Russia,' with the exception 
of few of her provinces, consists, like the interior of America, 
of a vast inland continent, desolated and deformed by prairies, or 
steppes, as they are there called, inhabited by a sparse population ; 
and, as an appeal has been made to experience, 1 ask any gentle- 
man to show me an instance of any country under the sun that 
has, under these circumstances, taken a stand as a manufacturing 
or great commercial nation. These great rivers and inland seas 
cut a mighty figure on the map ; but, when you come to consider 
of capacities for foreign commerce, how unlike the insular situation 
of Great Britain, or the peninsular situation of almost the whole 
continent of Europe, surrounded or penetrated as it is by inland 
seas and gulfs ! May I be pardoned for adverting to the fact — I 
know that comparisons are extremely odious — that, when we look 
to Salem and Boston, to parts of the country where skill, and 
capital, and industry, notoriously exist, we find opposition to this 
bill; and that, when we look to countries which could sooner build 
one hundred pyramids, such as that of Cheops, than manufacture 
one cambric needle, or a paper of Whitechapel pins, or a watch 
spring, we hear a clamor about this system for the protection of 
manufactures. The merchants and manufacturers of Massachu- 
setts, New Hampshire, the province of Maine, and Sagadahock 
repel this bill, whilst men in hunting shirts, with deer-skin leggins 
and moccasons on their feet, want protection for manufactures — 
men with rifles on their shoulders, and long knives in their belts, 
31 * 



366 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH 



seeking in the forests to lay in their next winter's supply of bear- 
meat. But it is not there alone the cry is heard. It is at Balti- 
more — decayed, deserted Baltimore, whose exports have more 
than one half decreased, while those of Boston have four times 
increased— it is decayed and deserted Baltimore that comes here 
and asks us for the protection of those interests which have grown 
up during the late war — privateering among the number, I pre- 
sume. Philadelphia, too, in a state of atrophy, asks for the meas- 
ure — Philadelphia, who never can, pass what bill you please, 
have a foreign trade to any great amount, or become a great manu- 
facturing town, for which she wants all the elements of climate, 
coal, and capital — this city, now overbuilt, swollen to the utmost 
extent of the integument, and utterly destitute of force or weight 
in the Union, wants this bill for the protection of the domestic in- 
dustry of her free blacks, I presume. New York, too, is now will- 
ing to build up Montreal and Quebec at her expense — to convert 
the Hudson into a theatre for rival disputants about steam-boats 
in the courts below stairs, and for them, and such as them, with, a 
coasting license to ply upon. The true remedy, and the only 
one, for the iron manufacturer of Pennsylvania, who has nothing 
but iron to sell, — and that, they tell us, is worth nothing, — would be 
to lay on the table of this house a declaration of war in blank, 
and then go into a committee of the whole, to see what nation in 
the world it would be most convenient to go to war with — for, fill 
the blank with the name of what power you please, it must be a 
sovereign state, and though it have not a seaman or a vessel in 
the world, its commissions are as good and valid in an admiralty 
court, as those of the lord high admiral of Great Britain. In 
this way you will put our furnaces in blast, and your paper-mills 
into full operation ; and many, very many, who, during the last 
war, transported flour on horseback for the supply of your army, 
at the cost of a hundred dollars per barrel, and who have since 
transported provisions in steam-boats up and down the Missouri river 
— very many such individuals would thus be taken out of the very 
jaws of bankruptcy and lifted up to opulence, at the expense of 
that people, at whose expense, also, you are now about to enable 
these iron manufacturers to fill their pockets. New England does 
not want this bill. Connecticut, indeed, molasses having been 
thrown overboard to lighten the ship, votes for this bill. A word 
m the ear of the land of steady habits — I voted against that tax, 
on the principle, which has always directed my public life, not to 
compromise my opinions — not to do evil that good may come of 
it — let me tell the land of steady habits, that, after this bill -shall 
be fairly off the shore ; after we shall have cleared decks and made 
ready for action again ; after she shall have imposed on me the 
onerous burden of this bill, she shall have the benefit of my vote 



ON THE TARIFF BILL. 



367 



to put on again this duty on molasses— not at this day—this is not 
the last tariff measure ; for in less than five years, I would, if I 
were a betting man, wager any odds that we have another tariff 
proposition, worse by far than that, amendments to which gentle- 
men had strangled yesterday by the bowstring of the previous 
question. Fair dealing leads to safe counsels and safe issues. 
There is a certain left-handed wisdom, that often overreaches its 
own objects, which grasps at the shadow, and lets go the substance. 
We shall not only have this duty on molasses, I can tell the gen- 
tleman from Connecticut, but we shall have, moreover, an addi 
tional bounty on intoxication by whisky, in the shape of an ad- 
ditional duty on foreign distilled spirits. 

The ancient commonwealth of Virginia, one of whose unwor- 
thy sons, and more unworthy representatives, I am, must now be- 
gin to open her eyes to the fatal policy which she has pursued for 
the last forty years. I have not a doubt, that they who were the 
agents for transferring her vast, and boundless, and fertile country 
to the United States, with an express stipulation, in effect, that 
not an acre of it should ever enure to the benefit of any man from 
Virginia, were as respectable, and kind-hearted, and hospitable, 
and polished, and guileless Virginia gentlemen, as ever were 
cheated out of their estates by their overseers ; men who, as long 
as they could command the means, by sale of their last acre, or 
last negro, would have a good dinner, and give a hearty welcome 
to whomsoever chose to drop in to eat, friend or stranger, bidden 
or unbidden. What will be the effect of this bill on the Southern 
States ? The effect of this policy is, what I shudder to look at ; 
the more because the next census is held up in terrorem over us. 
We are told, you had better consent to this — we are not threat- 
ened exactly with general Gage and the Boston port bill ; but we 
are told by gentlemen, we shall, after the next census, so saddle, 
and bridle, and martingale you, that you will be easily regulated 
by any bit, or whip, however severe, or spurs, however rank, of 
domestic manufacture that we choose to use. But this argument, 
sir, has no weight in it with me. I do not choose to be roboed 
now, because, after I am once robbed, it will be easier to rob me 
again. Obsta principiis is my maxim — because every act of ex- 
tension of the system operates in a twofold way, decreasing the 
strength and means of the robbed, and increasing those of the rob- 
ber. This is as true as any proposition in mathematics. Gentle- 
men need not tell us, we had better give in at once. No, sir, we 
shall not give in ; no, we shall hold out — we shall not give in 
We do not mean to be threatened out of our rights by the menace 
of another census. We are aware of our folly, and it is our busi- 
ness to provide against the consequences of it ; but not in this way 
When I recollect that the tariff of 1816 was followed by that o* 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH 



1819-20, and that by this measure of 1823-4, I cannot believe 
that we are, at any time hereafter, long to be exempt from the de- 
mands of these sturdy beggars who will take no denial. Every 
concession does but render every fresh demand and new conces- 
sion more easy. It is like those dastard nations who vainly think 
to buy peace. When I look back to what the country of which I 
am a representative was, and when I see what she is — when I 
recollect the expression of lord Cornwallis, applied to Virginia, 
" that great and unterrified colony," which he was about to enter, 
not without some misgivings of his mind as to the result of the in- 
vasion — when I compare what she was when this house of 
representatives first assembled in the city of New York, and 
what she now is, I know, by the disastrous contrast, that her coun- 
cils have not been governed by statesmen. They might be admi- 
rable professors of a university, powerful dialecticians ex cathedra, 
but no sound counsels of wise statesmen could ever lead to such 
practical ill results as are exhibited by a comparison of the past 
and present condition of the ancient colony and dominion of Vir- 
ginia. 

In the course of this discussion, I have heard, I will not say 
with surprise, because nil admirari is my motto — no doctrine that 
can be broached on this floor, can ever, hereafter, excite surprise in 
my mind — I have heard the names of Say, Ganilh, Adam Smith, 
and Ricardo, pronounced not only in terms, but in a tone of sneer- 
ing contempt, visionary theorists, destitute of practical wisdom, 
and the whole clan of Scotch and Quarterly reviewers lugged in to 
boot. This, sir, is a sweeping clause of proscription. With the 
names of Say, Smith, and Ganilh, I profess to be acquainted, for I, 
too, am versed in title-pages; but I did not expect to hear, in this 
house, a name, with which I am a little further acquainted, treated 
with so little ceremony: and by whom? I leave Adam Smith to 
the simplicity, and majesty, and strength of his own native genius, 
which has canonized his name — a name which will be pronounced 
with veneration, when not one in this house will be remember- 
ed. But one word as to Ricardo, the last mentioned of these 
writers — a new authority, though the grave has already closed up- 
on hirn, and set its seal upon his reputation. I shall speak of him in 
the language of a man of as great a genius as this, or perhaps any, 
age has ever produced ; a man remarkable for the depth of his re- 
flections and the acumen of his penetration. "■ I had been led," 
says this man, " to look into loads of books — my understanding 
had for too many years been intimate with severe thinkers, 
with logic, and the great masters of knowledge, not to be aware 
of the utter feebleness of the herd of modern economists. I 
sometimes read chapters from more recent works, or part of 
parliamentary debates. I saw that these " [ominous words !] 



i 



ON THE TARIFF BILL. 



369 



were generally the very dregs and rinsings of the human intel- 
lect." [I am very glad, sir, he did not read our debates. 
What would he have said of ours ?] "At length a friend sent me 
Mr. Ricardo's book, and, recurring to my own prophetic antici- 
pation of the advent of some legislator on this science, I said, 
Thou art the man. Wonder and curiosity had long been dead 
m me ; yet I wondered once more. Had this profound work 
been really written in England during the 19th century ? Could it 
be that an Englishman, and he not in academic bowers, but op- 
pressed by mercantile and senatorial cares, had accomplished what 
all the universities and a century of thought had failed to advance 
by one hair's breadth ? All other writers had been crushed and 
overlaid by the enormous weight of facts and documents : Mr. 
Ricardo had deduced, a priori, from the understanding itself, 
laws which first gave a ray of light into the unwieldy chaos of 
materials, and had constructed what had been but a collection of 
tentitive discussions, into a science of regular proportions, now 
first standing on an eternal basis." 

I pronounce no opinion of my own on Ricardo ; I recur rather 
to the opinion of a man inferior, in point of original and native ge- 
nius, and that highly cultivated, too, to none of the moderns, and 
few of the ancients. Upon this subject, what shall we say to the 
following fact ? Butler, who is known to gentlemen of the pro- 
fession of the law, as the annotator, with Hargrave, on lord Coke, 
speaking with Fox as to political economy — that most extraordi- 
nary man, unrivalled for his powers of debate, excelled by no man 
that ever lived, or probably ever will live, as a public debater, and 
of the deepest political erudition, fairly confessed that he had nev- 
er read Adam Smith. Butler said to Mr. Fox, " that he had never 
read Adam Smith's work on the Wealth of Nations." " To tell 
you the truth," replied Mr. Fox, " nor I neither. There is something 
in all these subjects that passes my comprehension — something so 
wide that I could never embrace them myself, or find any one 
who did." And yet we see how we, with our little dividers, un- 
dertake to lay off the scale, and with our pack-thread to take the 
soundings, and speak with a confidence peculiar to quacks (in 
which the regular-bred professor never indulges) on this abstruse 
and perplexing subject. Confidence is one thing, knowledge an- 
other ; of the want of which, overweening confidence is notorious- 
ly the indication. What of that ? Let Ganilh, Say, Ricardo, 
Smith, all Greek and Roman fame be against us ; we appeal to 
Dionysius in support of our doctrines ; and to him, not on the 
throne of Syracuse, but at Corinth — not in absolute possession of 
the most wonderful and enigmatical city, as difficult to comprehend 
as the abtrusest problem of political economy, which furnished 
not only the means but the men for supporting the greatest wars — a 

A A A 



370 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH 



kingdom within itself, under whose ascendant the genius of Ath- 
ens, in her most high and palmy state, quailed, and stood rebuked. 
No; we follow the pedagogue to the schools — dictating in the 
classic shades of Longwood — (lucus a non lucendo) — to his dis- 
ciples. 

We have been told that the economists are right in theory 
and wrong in practice ; which is as much as to say, that two bodies 
occupy at the same time the same space; for it is equally impracti- 
cable to be right in theory and wrong in practice. It is easy to be 
wrong in practice ; but if our practice corresponds with our theory, 
it is a solecism to say that we can be right in the one and wrong in 
the other. As for Alexander and Caesar, I have as little respect for 
their memory as is consistent with that involuntary homage which 
all must pay to men of their prowess and abilities ; and if Alexan- 
der had suffered himself to be led by the nose out of Babylon and 
banished to Sinope, or if Caesar had suffered himself to be deprived 
of his imperial sway, not by the dagger of the assassin, but by 
his own slavish fears, I should have as little respect for their mem- 
ory as for that of him whose example has on this occasion been 
held up to us for admiration. Speaking of that man who has 
kept me awake night after night, and has been to me an incubus 
by day, for fear of the vastness of his designs, 1 cannot conceive 
of a spectacle so pitiful, so despicable, as that man, under 
those circumstances ; and if the work dictated by him at St. He- 
lena be read with the slightest attention, no forsworn witness at the 
Old Bailey was ever detected in so many contradictions as he has 
been guilty of. No, sir, the Jupiter from whose reluctant hand 
the thunderbolt is wrung, is not the one at whose shrine I worship 
— not that I think that the true Amphytrion is always him with 
whom we dine. Napoleon is not the political economist who is to 
take place of Smith and Ricardo. Will any man make me 
believe that he understood the theory or the practice of political 
economy better than these men, or than Charles Fox ? Impossi- 
ble. When I recollect what that man might have done for liberty, 
and what he did ; when I recollect that to him we owe this Holy 
Alliance — this fearful power of Russia — of Russia, where I should 
advise persons to go who desire to be instructed in petty treason 
by the murder of a husband, or in parricide by the murder of a 
father, but from whom I should never think of taking a lesson in 
political economy — to whom I say rather, pay your debts, not in 
depreciated paper ; do not commit daily acts of bankruptcy ; re- 
store your currency : practise on the principles of liberality and 
justice, and then I will listen to you. No, sir, Russia may, if she 
pleases, not only lay heavy duties on imports ; she may prohibit 
them if she pleases ; she has nothing to export but what some in- 
land countries have, political power — physical, to be sure, as well 



ON THE TARIFF BILL. 



371 



as intellectual power — but she does not even dare to attack the 
Turk: she cannot stir: she is something like some of our interior 
people of the south, who have plenty of land, plenty of serfs, 
smoke-houses filled with meat, and very fine horses to ride, but 
who, when they go abroad, have not one shilling to bless them- 
selves with : and so long as she is at peace, and does not trouble 
the rest of the world,, so long she may be suffered to remain : but, 
if she should continue to act hereafter as she has done heretofore, 
it will be the interest of the civilized world to procure her dis- 
memberment, per fas aut nefas. 

But it is said, a measure of this sort is necessary to create em- 
ployment for the people. Why, sir, where are the hjandles of the 
plough ? Are they unfit for young gentlemen to touch ? Or will 
they rather choose to enter your military academies, where the sons 
of the rich are educated at the expense of the poor, and where so 
many political janissaries are every year turned out, always ready 
for war, and to support the powers that be — equal to the strelitzes 
of Moscow or St. Petersburg. I do not speak now of individuals, 
of course, but of the tendency of the system — the hounds follow 
the huntsman because he feeds them, and bears the whip. I speak 
of the system. I concur most heartily, sir, in the censure which 
has been passed upon the greediness of office, which stands a stig- 
ma on the present generation. Men from whom we might expect, 
and from whom I did expect, better things, crowd the antechamber 
of the palace, for every vacant office ; nay, even before men are 
dead, their shoes are wanted for some barefooted office-seeker. 
How mistaken was the old Roman, the old consul, who, whilst 
he held the plough by one hand, and death held the other, ex- 
claimed, " Diis immortalibus sero ! " 

Our fathers, how did they acquire their property ? By straight- 
forward industry, rectitude, and frugality. How did they become 
dispossessed of their property ? By indulging in speculative hopes 
and designs, seeking the shadow whilst they lost the substance ; 
and now, instead of being, as they were, men of respectability, 
men of substance, men capable and willing to live independently 
and honestly, and hospitably too — for who so parsimonious as the 
prodigal who has nothing to give ? — what have we become ? A 
nation of sharks, preying on one another through the instrumental- 
ity of this paper system, which, if Lycurgus had known of it, he 
would unquestionably have adopted, in preference to his iron mon- 
ey, if his object had been to make the Spartans the most accom- 
plished knaves as well as to keep them poor. 

But we are told this is a curious constitution of ours: it is made 
for foreigners, and not for ourselves — for the protection of foreign, 
and not of American industry. Sir, this is a curious constitution 
of ours, and if I were disposed to deny it, I could not succeed 



372 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH 



It is an anomaly in itself. It is that supposed impossibility of all 
writers, from Aristotle to the present day, an imperium in imperio. 
Nothing like it ever did exist, or possibly ever will, under similar 
circumstances. It is a constitution consisting of confederated 
bodies, for certain exterior purposes, and also for some interior pur- 
poses, but leaving to the state authorities, among a great many 
powers, the very one which we now propose to exercise ; for, if 
we are now passing a revenue bill — a bill the object of which 
were to raise revenue — however much I should deny the policy, 
and however I could demonstrate the futility of the plan, I still 
should deem it to be a constitutional bill — a bill passed to carry, 
bona fide, into effect, a provision of the constitution, but a bill 
passed with sfiort-sighted views. But this is no such bill. It is a 
bill, under pretence of regulating commerce, to take money from 
the pockets of a very large, and, I thank God, contiguous territory, 
and to put it into other pockets. One word, sir, on that point ; — 
I can assure the gentlemen whose appetites are so keenly whetted 
<br our money — I trust, at least, if this bill passes, there will be a 
meeting of the members opposed to it, and a general and consen- 
taneous resistance to its operation throughout the whole southern 
country — and we shall make it by lawful means ; quant a nous, 
the law will be a dead letter. It shall be to me, at least, as in- 
nocuous as the pill of the empiric which I am determined not to 
swallow. The manufacturer of the east may carry his woollens or 
his cottons, or his coffins, to what market he pleases — I do not buy 
of him. Self-defence is the first law of nature. You drive us 
into it. You create heats and animosities among this great family, 
who ought to live like brothers ; and, after you have got this tem- 
per of mind roused among the southern people, do you expect to 
come among us to trade, and expect us to buy your wares ? Sir, 
not only shall we not buy them, but we shall take such measures 
(I will not enter into the detail of them now 7 ) as shall render it 
impossible for you to sell them. Whatever may be said here of 
the " misguided counsels " as they have been termed, " of the 
theorists of Virginia," they have, so far as regards this ques- 
tion, the confidence of united Virginia. We are asked — Does the 
south lose any thing by this bill — why do you cry out ? I put it, 
sir, to any man from any part of the country, from the gulf of 
Mexico, from the Balize, to the eastern shore of Maryland — 
which, I thank Heaven, is not yet under the government of Balti- 
more, and will not be, unless certain theories should come into play 
in that state, which we have lately heard of, and a majority of 
men, told by the head, should govern — whether the whole country 
between the points I have named, is not unanimous in opposition 
to this bill. Would it not be unexampled, that we should thus 
complain, protest, resist, and that all the while nothing should be 



ON THE TARIFF BILL. 



the matter ? Are our understandings (however low mine may be 
rated, much sounder than mine are engaged in this resistance), to 
be rated so low, as that we are to be made to believe that we are 
children affrighted by a bugbear ? We are asked, however, why 
do you cry out ? it is all for your good. Sir, this reminds me of 
the mistresses of George II., who, when they were insulted by the 
populace on arriving in London (as all such creatures deserve to 
be, by every mob), put their heads out of the window, and said to 
them in their broken English, " Goot people, we be come for your 
goots :" to which one of the mob rejoined — " Yes, and for our 
chattels too, I fancy." Just so it is with the oppressive exactions 
proposed and advocated by the supporters of this bill, on the plea 
of the good of those who are its victims. 

There is not a member in this house, sir, more deeply penetrated 
than the one who is endeavoring to address you, with the inade- 
quate manner in which he has discharged the task imposed upon 
him ; in this instance, he will say, on his part, most reluctantly. 
But, as I have been all my life a smatterer in history, I cannot 
fail to be struck with the fitness of the comparison instituted by a 
historian of this country with the Roman republic, just as it was in 
a state of preparation for a master. 

" Sed, postquam luxu, atque desidiacivitas corrupta est ; rursus 
respublica, magnitudine sua, imperatorum atque magistratuum vitia 
sustentabat ; ac veluti effoeta parentum, multis tempestatibus, baud 
sane quisquam Romas virtute magnus fuit." 

Of this quotation, I will, as they sometimes say in the parlia- 
ment, for the benefit of the country-gentlemen, attempt a translation. 
c£ But, after the state had become corrupted by luxury and sloth " — 
in the Arabian Nights' Entertainments, we are told of one who laid 
by his sequins in good money, and when he afterwards came to 
use them, he found them to be bits of paper, not worth more than 
old continental (or Kentucky) money — " by luxury and sloth, 
again the republic," — and here I press the comparison — " by dint 
of its own magnitude, its own greatness, its own vastness, bore up 
under the faults, the vices of its generals, magistrates, and that, too, 
as if effete (past bearing) since for a long while" — I hope the com- 
parison will not hold here — Ci for a long time scarcely any man had 
become great at Rome by his merit." So, sir, it is with this 
republic. It does sustain, by its greatness and growing magnitude, 
the follies and vices of its magistracy. Had this government been 
stationary like any of the old governments of Europe, of the second 
class, Prussia for instance, or Holland, by the political evolutions 
of the last thirty years, I might say the last twelve years, it would 
have sunk into insignificance and debility ; and it is only upon this 
resource, the increasing greatness of this republic, that the blun- 
derers who plunge blindfold into schemes like this, can rely for 
32 



374 



MR. RANDOLPH'S SPEECH 



any possibility of salvation from the effect of their own rash, 
undigested measures. It is true, that the race is not to the swift, 
nor the battle to the strong; and elsewhere than in the republic 
of Rome, and of other times than the days of Catiline, it may be 
said, " Haud sane quisque virtute magnus est." 

" 'Tis not in mortals to command success ! — 

But do you more, Sempronius ! — donH deserve it, 

And take my word you won't have any less ; 
Be wary, watch the time, and always serve it: 

Give gentle way when there's too great a press ; 
And for your conscience, only learn to nerve it, — 

For, like a racer, or a boxer, training, 

'Twill make, if proved, vast efforts without paining." 

I had more to say, Mr. Speaker, could I have said it, on this 
subject. But I cannot sit down without asking those, who were 
once my brethren of the church, the elders of the young family of 
this good old republic of the thirteen states, if they can consent to 
rivet upon us this system, from which no benefit can possibly result 
to themselves. I put it to them as descendants of the renowned 
colony of Virginia ; as children sprung from her loins ; if for the 
sake of all the benefits, with which this bill is pretended to be 
freighted to them, Granting such to be the fact for argument's 
sake, they could consent to do such an act of violence to the 
unanimous opinion, feelings, prejudices, if you will, of the whole 
Southern States, as to pass it ? I go farther. I ask of them what 
is there in the condition of the nation, at this time, that calls for 
the immediate adoption of this measure ? Are the Gauls at the 
gate of the capitol ? If they are, the cacklings of the Capitoline 
geese will hardly save it. What is there to induce us to plunge into 
the vortex of those evils so severely felt in Europe from this very 
manufacturing and paper policy ? For it is evident that, if we go 
into this system of policy, we must adopt the European institutions 
also. We have very good materials to work with ; we have only 
to make our elective king president for life, in the first place, and 
then to make the succession hereditary in the family of the first 
that shall happen to have a promising son. For a king we can 
be at no loss — ex quovis ligno — any block will do for him. The 
senate may, perhaps, be transmuted into a house of peers, 
although we should meet with more difficulty than in the other 
case ; for Bonaparte himself was not more hardly put to it, to 
recruit the ranks of his mushroom nobility, than we should be to 
furnish a house of peers. As for us, we are the faithful commons, 
ready made to hand ; but with all our loyalty, I congratulate the 
house — I congratulate the nation — that, although this body is daily 
degraded by the sight of members of congress manufactured into, 
placemen, we have not yet reached such a point of degradation as 
to suffer executive minions to be manufactured into members of 



ON THE TARIFF BILL. 



375 



confess. We have shut that door; I wish we could shut the 
other also. I wish we could have a perpetual call of the house 
in this view, and suffer no one to get out from its closed doors. 
The time is peculiarly inauspicious for the change in our policy 
which is proposed by this bill. We are on the eve of an elec- 
tion that promises to be the most distracted that this nation has 
ever yet undergone. It may turn out to be a Polish election. 
At such a time, ought any measure to be brought forward which 
is supposed to be capable of being demonstrated to be extremely 
injurious to one great portion of this country, and beneficial in 
proportion to another ? Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof. 
There are firebrands enough in the land, without this apple of 
discord being cast into this assembly. Suppose this measure is not 
what it is represented to be ; that the fears of the south are alto- 
gether illusory and visionary; that it will produce all the good 
predicted of it — an honorable gentleman from Kentucky said 
yesterday — and I was sorry to hear it, for I have great respect for 
that gentleman, and for other t r entlemen from that state — that the 
question was not whether a bare majority should pass the bill, but 
whether the majority or the minority should rule. The gentleman 
is wrong, and, if he will consider the matter rightly, he will see it. Is 
there no difference between the patient and the actor ? We are 
passive : we do not call them to act or to suffer, but we call upon 
them not so to act as that we must necessarily suffer ; and I ven- 
ture to say, that in any government, properly constituted, this 
very consideration would operate conclusively, that if the burden 
;s to be laid on 102, it ought not to be laid by 105. We are the 
eel that is being flayed, while the cook-maid pats us on the head, 
and cries, with the clown in King Lear, " Down, wantons, down.'' 
There is but one portion of the country which can profit by this 
bill, and from that portion of the country comes this bare majority 
in favor of it. I bless God that Massachusetts and old Virginia 
are once again rallying under the same banner, against oppressive 
and unconstitutional taxation ; for, if all the blood be drawn from 
out the body, I care not whether it be by the British parliament 
or the American congress ; by an emperor or a king abroad, or by 
a president at home. 

Under these views, and with feelings of mortification and shame 
at the very weak opposition 1 have been able to make to this bill, 
1 entreat gentlemen to consent that it may lie over, at least, uatil 
the next session of congress. W^e have other business to attend 
to, and our families and affairs need our attention at home ; and 
indeed I, sir, would not give one farthing for any man w T ho prefers 
being here to being at home ; w 7 ho is a good public man and a 
bad private one. With these views and feelings, I move you, sir, 
that U>e b'll be indefinitely postponed 



376 



SPEECH OF DANIEL WEBSTER 

ON 

THE PANAMA MISSION, 



DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED 
STATES, APRIL 14, 1826. 



The following resolution being under consideration, in committee of the 
whole house upon the state of the Union, viz., 

" Resolved, That, in the opinion of the house, it is expedient to appropri- 
ate the funds necessary to enable the president of the United States to 
send ministers to the congress of Panama ; " 

Mr. M'Lane, of Delaware, submitted the following amendment thereto : 

' It being understood as the opinion of this house, that, as it has always 
been the settled policy of this government, in extending our commercial 
relations with foreign nations, to have with them as little political connec- 
tion as possible, to preserve peace, commerce, and friendship with all na- 
tions, and to form entangling alliances with none ; the ministers who may 
be sent shall attend at the said congress in a diplomatic character mere 
ly, and ought not to be authorized to discuss, consider, or consult, upon 
any proposition of alliance, offensive or defensive, between this country 
and any of the Spanish American governments, or any stipulation, com- 
pact, or declaration, binding the United States in any way, or to any ex- 
tent, to resist interference from abroad, with the domestic concerns of 
the aforesaid governments ; or any measure which shall commit the pres- 
ent or future neutral rights or duties of these United States, either as may 
regard European nations, or between the several states of Mexico and 
South America; leaving the United States free to adopt, in any event 
which may happen, affecting the relations of the South American gov- 
ernments, with each other, or with foreign nations, such measures as the 
friendly disposition cherished by the American people towards the people 
of those states, and the honor and interest of this nation may require." 

To which Mr. Rives proposed to add, after the words, a aforesaid govern- 
ments," in the 12th line, the following : 

' Or any compact or engagement by which the United States shall be 
pledged to the Spanish American states, to maintain, by force, the princi- 
ple that no part of the American continent is henceforward subject to 
colonization by any European power." 

The preceding motions to amend being under consideration, Mr. Webster 
delivered the following speech : — 

Mr. Chairman, 
I am not ambitious of amplifying this discussion. On the con- 
trary, it is my anxious wish to confine the debate, so far as I par- 
take in it, to the real and material questions before us. 



MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH, &c. 



377 



Our judgment of things is liable, doubtless, to be affected by 
our opinions of men. It would be affectation in me, or in any one, 
to claim an exemption from this possibility of bias. 1 can say, 
however, that it has been my sincere purpose to consider and dis- 
cuss the present subject, with the single view of finding out what 
duty it devolves upon me, as a member of the house of repre- 
sentatives. If any thing has diverted me from that sole aim, it has 
been against my intention. 

1 think, sir, that there are two questions, and two only for our 
decision. The first is, whether the house of representatives will 
assume the responsibility of withholding the ordinary appropriation 
for carrying into effect an executive measure, which the executive 
department has constitutionally instituted ; the second, whether, 
if it will not withhold the appropriation, it will yet take the respon- 
sibility of interposing, with its own opinions, directions or instruc- 
tions, as to the manner in which this particular executive measure 
shall be conducted. 

I am, certainly, in the negative, on both these propositions. I 
am neither willing to refuse the appropriation, nor am I willing to 
limit or restrain the discretion of the executive, beforehand, as to 
the manner in which it shall perform its own appropriate constitu- 
tional duties. And, sir, those of us who hold these opinions have 
the advantage of being on the common highway of national poli- 
tics. We propose nothing new ; we suggest no change ; we ad- 
here to the uniform practice of the government, as I understood 
it, from its origin. It is for those, on the other hand, who are in 
favor of either, or both of the propositions, to show us the co- 
gent reasons which recommend their adoption. The duty is on 
them, to satisfy the house and the country that there is something 
in the present occasion which calls for such an extraordinary and 
unprecedented interference. 

The president and senate have instituted a public mission, for 
the purpose of treating with foreign states. The constitution gives 
to the president the power of appointing, with the consent of the 
senate, ambassadors, and other public ministers. Such appoint- 
ment is, therefore, a clear and unquestionable exercise of executive 
power. It is, indeed, less connected with the appropriate duties 
of this house, than almost any other executive act ; because the 
office of a public minister is not created by any statute or law of 
our own government. It exists under the law of nations, and is 
recognized as existing by our constitution. The acts of congress, 
indeed, limit the salaries of public ministers ; but they do no more. 
Every thing else, in regard to the appointment of public ministers, 
their numbers, the time of their appointment, and the negotiations 
contem Ued in such appointments, is matter for executive discre- 
tion, very new appointment to supply vacancies in existing 
3-2* Bbb 



378 



MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH 



missions, is under the same authority. There are, indeed, what 
we commonly term standing missions, so known in the practice of 
the government, but they are not made so by any law. All mis- 
sions rest on the same ground. Now the question is, whether the 
president and senate, having created this mission, or, in other 
words, having appointed the ministers, in the exercise of their un- 
doubted constitutional power, this house will take upon itself the 
responsibility of defeating its objects, and rendering this exercise 
of executive power void. 

By voting the salaries, in the ordinary way, we assume, as it 
seems to me, no responsibility whatever. We merely empower 
another branch of the government to discharge its own appropriate 
duties, in that mode which seems to itself most conducive to the 
public interests. We are, by so voting, no more responsible for 
the manner in which the negotiation shall be conducted, than we 
are for the manner in which one of the heads of department may 
discharge the duties of his office. 

On the other hand, if we withhold the ordinary means, we do 
incur a heavy responsibility. We interfere, as it seems to me, to 
prevent the action of the government, according to constitu- 
tional forms and provisions. It ought constantly to be remembered, 
that our whole power in the case is merely incidental. It is only 
because public ministers must have salaries, like other officers, and 
because no salaries can be paid, but by our vote, that the subject is 
referred to us at all. The constitution vests the power of appoint- 
ment in the president and senate ; the law gives to the president 
even the power of fixing the amount of salary, within certain lim- 
its ; and the only question, here, is upon the appropriation. There 
is no doubt that we have the power, if we see fit to exercise it, to 
break up the mission, by withholding the salaries ; we have power 
also to break up the court, by withholding the salaries of the 
judges, or to break up the office of president, by withholding the 
salary provided for it by law. All these things, it is true, we 
have the power to do, since we hold the keys of the treasury. 
But, then, can we rightfully exercise this power? The gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Buchanan), with whom I have great 
pleasure in concurring on this part of the case, while I regret that 
I differ with him on others, has placed this question in a point of 
view which cannot be improved. These officers do, indeed, al- 
ready exist. They are public ministers. If they were to negotiate 
a treaty, and the senate should ratify it, it would become a law of 
the land, whether we voted their salaries or not. This shows that 
the constitution never contemplated that the house of representa- 
tives should act a part in originating negotiations, or concluding 
treaties. 

I know, sir, it is a useless labor to discuss the kind of pow T er 



ON THE PANAMA MISSION. 



379 



which this house incidentally holds m these cases. Men will dif- 
fer in that particular ; and as the forms of public business and of 
the constitution are such, that the power may be exercised by this 
house, there will always be some, or always may be some, who 
feel inclined to exercise it. For myself, I feel bound not to step 
out of my own sphere, and neither to exercise nor control any au- 
thority, of which the constitution has intended to lodge the free 
and unrestrained exercise in other hands. Cases of extreme ne- 
cessity, in which a regard to public safety is to be the supreme 
law, or rather to take place of all law, must be allowed to provide 
for themselves, when they arise. Reasoning from such possible 
cases, will shed no light on the general path of our constitutional 
duty. 

Mr. Chairman, I have an habitual and very sincere respect for 
the opinions of the gentleman from Delaware. And I can say 
with truth, that he is the last man in the house from whom I 
should have looked for this proposition of amendment, or from 
whom I should have expected to hear some of the reasons 
which he has given in its support. He says, that, in this matter, 
the source from which the measure springs should have no influ- 
ence with us whatever. I do not comprehend this ; and I cannot 
but think the honorable gentleman has been surprised into an ex- 
pression which does not convey his meaning. This measure comes 
from the executive, and it is an appropriate exercise of executive 
power. How is it, then, that we are to consider it as entirely an 
open question for us ; as if it were a legislative measure, origina- 
ting with ourselves ? In deciding whether we will enable the ex- 
ecutive to exercise his own duties, are we to consider whether we 
should have exercised them in the same way ourselves? And if 
we differ in opinion with the president and senate, are we on that 
account to refuse the ordinary means ? I think not, unless we 
mean to say, that we will exercise, ourselves, all the powers of the 
government. 

But the gentleman argues, that although, generally, such a 
course would not be proper, yet, in the present case, the president 
has especially referred the matter to our opinion ; that he has 
thrown off, or attempted to throw off, his own constitutional re- 
sponsibility ; or, at least, that he proposes to divide it with us ;. that 
he requests our advice, and that we, having referred that request 
to the committee on foreign affairs, have now received from that 
committee their report thereon. 

Sir, this appears to me a very mistaken view of the subject ; 
but if it were all so — if our advice and opinion had thus been 
asked — it would not alter the line of our duty. We cannot take, 
though it were offered, any share in executive duty. We cannot 
divide their own proper responsibility with other branches of the 



380 



MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH 



government. The president cannot properly ask, and wa cannot 
properly give, our advice as to the manner in which he sha.. dis- 
charge his duties. He cannot shift the responsibility from himself, 
and we cannot assume it. Such a course, sir, would confound all 
that is distinct in the constitutional assignment of our respective 
functions. It would break down all known divisions of power, 
and put an end to all just responsibility. If the president were to 
receive directions or advice from us, in things pertaining to the du- 
ties of his own office, what becomes of his responsibility to us and 
to the senate? We hold the impeaching power. We are to 
bring him to trial in any case of mal-administration. The sen- 
ate are to judge him by the constitution and laws ; and it would 
be singular, indeed, if, when such occasion should arise, the par- 
ty accused should have the means of sheltering himself under 
the advice or opinions of his accusers. Nothing can be more 
incorrect, or more dangerous, than this pledging the house before- 
hand to any opinion, as to the manner of discharging executive 
duties. 

But, sir, I see no evidence whatever that the president has ask- 
ed us to take this measure upon ourselves, or to divide the respon- 
sibility of it with him. I see no such invitation or request. The 
senate having concurred in the mission, the president has sent a 
message, requesting the appropriation, in the usual and common 
form. Another message is sent, in answer to a call of the house, 
communicating the correspondence, and setting forth the objects of 
the mission. It is contended that, by this message, he asks our 
advice, or refers the subject to our opinion. I do not so under- 
stand it. Our concurrence, he says, by making the appropriation, 
is subject to our free determination. Doubtless it is so. If we 
determine at all, we shall determine freely ; and the message does 
no more than leave to ourselves to decide how far we feel our- 
selves bound, either to support or to thwart the executive depart- 
ment, in the exercise of its duties. There is no message, no doc- 
ument, no communication to us, which asks for our concurrence, 
otherwise than as we shall manifest it by making the appro- 
priation. 

Undoubtedly, sir, the president would be glad to know that the 
measure met the approbation of the house. He must be aware, 
unquestionably, that all leading measures mainly depend for success 
on the support of congress. Still, there is no evidence that on 
this occasion he has sought to throw off responsibility from himself, 
or that he desires of us to be answerable for any thing beyond the 
discharge of our own constitutional duties. I have already said, 
sir, that I know of no precedent for such a proceeding as the 
amendment proposed by the gentleman from Delaware. None 
which I think analogous has been cited. The resolution of the 



ON THE PANAMA MISSION. 



381 



house, some years ago, on the subject of the slave-trade, is a 
precedent the other way. A committee had reported, that, in 
order to put an end to the slave-trade, a mutual right of search 
might be admitted and arranged by negotiation. But this opinion 
was not incorporated, as the gentleman now proposes to incorporate 
his amendment, into the resolution of the house. The resolution 
only declared, in general terms, that the president be requested to 
enter upon such negotiations with other powers as he might deem 
expedient, for the effectual abolition of the African slave-trade. 
It is singular enough, and may serve as an admonition on the 
present occasion, that a negotiation having been concluded, in 
conformity to the opinions expressed, not, indeed, by the house, 
but by the committee, the treaty, when laid before the senate, was 
rejected by that body. 

The gentleman from Delaware himself says, that the constitu- 
tional responsibility pertains alone to the executive department ; 
and that none other has to do with it, as a public measure. These 
admissions seem to me to conclude the question ; because, in the 
first place, if the constitutional responsibility appertains alone to 
the president, he cannot devolve it on us, if he would ; and 
because, in the second place, 1 see no proof of any intention on 
his part, so to devolve it on us, even if he had the power. 

Mr. Chairman : I will here take occasion, in order to prevent 
misapprehension, to observe, that no one is more convinced than I 
am, that it is the right of this house, and often its duty, to ex- 
press its general opinion in regard to questions of foreign policy. 
Nothing, certainly, is more proper. I have concurred in such 
proceedings, and am ready to do so again. On those great sub- 
jects, for instance, which form the leading topics in this discussion, 
it is not only the right of the house to express its opinions, but I 
think it its duty to do so, if it should think the executive to be 
pursuing a general course of policy which the house itself will not 
ultimately approve. But that is something entirely different from 
the present suggestion. Here it is proposed to decide, by our 
vote, what shall be discussed by particular ministers, already ap- 
pointed, when they shall meet the ministers of the other powers. 
This is not a general expression of opinion. It is a particular 
direction, or a special instruction. Its operation is limited to the 
conduct of particular men, on a particular occasion. Such a thing, 
sir, is wholly unprecedented in our history. When the house 
proceeds, in the accustomed way, by general resolution, its senti- 
ments apply, as far as expressed, to all public agents, and on all 
occasions. They apply to the whole course of policy, and must,, 
necessarily, be felt every where. But if we proceed by way of 
direction to particular ministers, we must direct them all. In short, 
we must ourselves furnish, in all cases, diplomatic instructions. 



382 



MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH 



We now propose to prescribe what our ministers shall discuss, 
and what they shall not discuss, at Panama. But there is no 
subject coming up for discussion at Panama, which might not also 
be proposed for discussion either here or at Mexico, or in the 
capital of Colombia. If we direct what our ministers at Panama 
shall or shall not say on the subject of Mr. Monroe's declaration, 
for example, why should we not proceed to say also what our 
other ministers abroad, or our secretary at home, shall say on the 
same subject ? There is precisely the same reason for one, as for 
the other. The course of the house, hitherto, sir, has not been 
such. It has expressed its opinions, when it deemed proper to 
express them at all, on great leading questions, by resolution, and 
in a general form. These general opinions, being thus made 
known, have doubtless always had, and such expressions of opin- 
ion doubtless always will have, their effect. This is the practice 
of the government. It is a salutary practice ; but if we carry it 
farther, or rather if we adopt a very different practice, and under- 
take to prescribe to our public ministers what they shall not discuss, 
we take upon ourselves that which, in my judgment, does not at 
all belong to us. I see no more propriety in our deciding now, in 
what manner these ministers shall discharge their duty, than there 
would have been in our prescribing to the president and senate 
what persons ought to have been appointed ministers. 

An honorable member from Virginia, who spoke some days 
ago (Mr. Rives), seems to go still farther than the member from 
Delaware. He maintains, that we may distinguish between the 
various objects contemplated by the executive in the proposed 
negotiation, and adopt some and reject others. And this high, 
delicate, and important trust, the gentleman deduces simply from 
our power to withhold the ministers' salaries. The process of the 
gentleman's argument appears to me as singular as its conclusion. 
He founds himself on the legal maxim, that he who has the power 
to give, may annex whatever condition or qualification to the gift 
he chooses. This maxim, sir, would be applicable to the present 
case, if we were the sovereigns of the country ; if all power were 
in our hands ; if the public money were entirely our own ; if our 
appropriation of it were mere grace and favor; and if there were 
no restraints upon us, but our own sovereign will and pleasure. 
But the argument totally forgets that we are ourselves but public 
agents ; that our power over the treasury is but that of stewards 
over a trust fund ; that we have nothing to give, and therefore no 
gifts to limit, or qualify ; that it is as much our duty to appropriate 
to proper objects, as to withhold appropriations from such as are im- 
proper; and that it is as much, and as clearly our duty to appropri- 
ate in a proper and constitutional manner, as to appropriate at all. 

The same honorable member advanced another idea, in which I 



ON TH PANAMA MISSION. 



383 



cannot concur. He does not admit that confidence is to be reposed 
m the executive, on the present occasion, because confidence, 
he argues, implies only, that not knowing ourselves what will be 
done in a given case by others, we trust to those who are to act ir 
it, that they will act right ; and as we know the course likely to be 
pursued in regard to this subject by the executive, confidence can 
have no place. This seems a singular notion of confidence ; cer- 
tainly it is not my notion of that confidence which the constitution 
requires one branch of the government to repose in another. The 
president is not our agent, but, like ourselves, the agent of the 
people. They have trusted to his hands the proper duties of his 
office ; and we are not to take those duties out of his hands, from 
any opinion of our own that we should execute them better our- 
selves. The confidence which is due from us to the executive, 
and from the executive to us, is not personal, but official and 
constitutional. It has nothing to do with individual likings or 
dislikings ; but results from that division of power among depart- 
ments, and those limitations on the authority of each, which belong 
to the nature and frame of our government. 

It would be unfortunate, indeed, if our line of constitutional 
action were to vibrate, backward and forward, according to our 
opinions of persons, swerving this way to-day, from undue attach- 
ment, and the other way to-morrow, from distrust or dislike. 
This may sometimes happen from the weakness of our virtues, or 
the excitement of our passions ; but I trust it will not be coolly 
recommended to us, as the rightful course of public conduct. 

It is obvious to remark, Mr. Chairman, that the senate have not 
undertaken to give directions or instructions in this case. That 
body is closely connected with the president in executive meas- 
ures. Its consent to these very appointments is made absolutely 
necessary by the constitution ; yet it has not seen fit, in this or 
any other case, to take upon itself the responsibility of directing 
the mode in which the negotiations should be conducted. 

For these reasons, Mr. Chairman, I am for giving no instruc- 
tions, advice, or directions in the case. I prefer leaving it where, 
in my judgment, the constitution has left it — to executive discre- 
tion and executive responsibility. 

But, sir, I think there are other objections to the amendment. 
There are parts of it which I could not agree to, if it were proper 
to attach any such condition to our vote. As to all that pan }f 
the amendment, indeed, which asserts the neutral policy of tfte 
United States, and the inexpediency of forming alliances, no man 
assents to those sentiments more readily, or more sincerely, thii^ 
myself. On these points, we are all agreed. Such is our opin- 
ion ; such, the president assures us, in terms, is his opinion ; sucL 
we know to be the opinion of the country. If it be thoughi 



384 



MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH 



necessary to affirm opinions which no one either denie; or doubts, 
by a resolution of the house, I shall cheerfully concur in it. But 
there is one part of the proposed amendment to which I could not 
agree, in any form. I wish to ask the gentleman from Delaware 
himself to reconsider it. I pray him to look at it again, and to 
see whether he means what it expresses or implies ; for, on this 
occasion, I should be more gratified by seeing that the honorable 
gentleman himself had become sensible that he had fallen intc 
some error, in this respect, than by seeing the vote of the house 
against him by any majority whatever. 

That part of the amendment to which I now object, is thai 
which requires, as a condition of the resolution before us, that the 
ministers " shall not be authorized to discuss, consider, or consult 
upon any measure which shall commit the present or future neutral 
rights or duties of these United States, either as may regard 
European nations, or between the several states of Mexico and 
South America." 

I need hardly repeat, that this amounts to a precise instruction. 
It being understood that the ministers shall not be authorized to 
discuss particular subjects, is a mode of speech precisely equiva- 
lent to saying, provided the ministers be instructed, or the ministers 
being instructed, not to discuss those subjects. After all that has 
been said, or can be said, about this amendment being no more 
than a general expression of opinion, or abstract proposition, this 
part of it is an exact and definite instruction. It prescribes to 
public ministers the precise manner in which they are to conduct 
a public negotiation ; a duty manifestly and exclusively belonging, 
m my judgment, to the executive, and not to us. 

But if we possessed the power to give instructions, this instruc- 
tion would not be proper to be given. Let us examine it. The 
ministers shall not " discuss, consider, or consult," &c. 

Now, sir, in the first place, it is to be observed, that they are 
not only not to agree to any such measure, but they are not to 
discuss it. If proposed to them, they are not to give reasons for 
declining it. Indeed, they cannot reject it ; they can only say, 
that they are not authorized to consider it. Would it not be bet- 
ter, sir, to leave these agents at* liberty to explain the policy of 
our government, fully and clearly, and to show the reasons which 
induce us to abstain, as far as possible, from foreign connections, 
and to act, in all things, with a scrupulous regard to the duties of 
neutrality ? 

But again : they are to discuss no measure which may commit 
our neutral rights or duties. To commit is somewhat indefinite. 
May they not modify nor in any degree alter our neutral rights and 
nuties ? If not, I hardly know whether a common treaty of com- 
merce could be negotiated ; because all such treaties affect or 



ON THE PANAMA MISSION. 



385 



modify, more or less, the neutral rights or duties of the parties ; 
especially all such treaties as our habitual policy leads us to form. 
But I suppose the author of the amendment uses the word in a 
larger and higher sense. He means that the ministers shall not 
discuss or consider any measure which may have a tendency, in 
any degree, to place us in a hostile attitude towards any foreign 
state. And here, again, one cannot help repeating, that the in- 
junction is, not to propose or assent to any such measure, but not 
to consider it ; not to answer it, if proposed ; not to resist it with 
reasons. 

But, if this objection were removed, still the instruction could 
not properly be given. What important or leading measure is 
there, connected with our foreign relations, which can be adopted, 
without the possibility of committing us to the necessity of a hos- 
tile attitude ? Any assertion of our plainest rights may, by possi- 
bility, have that effect. The author of the amendment seems to 
suppose that our pacific relations can never be changed, but by 
our own option. He seems not to be aware that other states may 
compel us, in defence of our own rights, to measures which, in 
their ultimate tendency, may commit our neutrality. Let me ask, 
if the ministers of other powers, at Panama, should signify to our 
agents, that it was in contemplation immediately to take some 
measure which these agents know to be hostile to our policy, ad- 
verse to our rights, and such as we could not submit to ; should 
they be left free to speak the sentiments of their government, to 
protest against the measure, and to declare that the United States 
would not see it carried into effect ? Or, should they, as this 
amendment proposes, be enjoined silence, let the measure proceed, 
and afterwards, when, perhaps, we go to war to redress the evil, 
we may learn, that if our objections had been fairly and frankly 
stated, the step would not have been taken? Look, sir, to the 
very case of Cuba, the most delicate, and vastly the most impor- 
tant point in all our foreign relations. Do gentlemen think they 
exhibit skill or statesmanship, in laying such restraints as they pro- 
pose on our ministers, in regard to this subject among others ? It 
has been made matter of complaint, that the executive has not 
used, already, a more decisive tone towards Mexico and Colombia, 
in regard to their designs on this island. Pray, sir, what tone 
could be taken, under these instructions ? Not one word, not one 
single word could be said on the subject. If asked whether the 
United States would consent to the occupation of that island by 
those republics, or to its transfer by Spain to a European power— 
or whether we should resist such occupation or such transfer — what 
could they say ? " That is a matter we cannot discuss, and can 
not consider ; it would commit our neutral relations ; we are not 
at liberty to express the sentiments of our government on the sub- 
33 Ceo 



386 



MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH 



ject : we have nothing at all to say." Is this, sir, what gentle- 
men wish, or what they would recommend ? 

If, sir, we give these instructions, and they should be obeyed, 
and inconvenience or evil result, who is answerable ? And I sup- 
pose it is expected they will be obeyed. Certainly it cannot be 
intended to give them, and not to take the responsibility of con- 
sequences, if they be followed. It cannot be intended to hold the 
president answerable both ways ; first, to obey our instructions, 
and, secondly, for having obeyed them, if evil comes from obeying 
them. 

Sir, events may change. If we had the power to give instruc- 
tions, and if these proposed instructions were proper to be given t 
before we arrive at our own homes, affairs may take a new direc- 
tion, and the public interest require new and corresponding or- 
ders to our agents abroad. 

This is said to be an extraordinary case, and, on that account, to 
justify our interference. If the fact were true, the consequence 
would not follow. If it be the exercise of a power assigned by 
the constitution to the executive, it can make no difference wheth- 
er the occasion be common or uncommon. But, in truth, there 
have been much stronger cases for the interference of the house, 
where, nevertheless, the house has not interfered. For example ; 
in the negotiations for peace carried on at Ghent. In that case, 
congress, by both houses, had declared war, for certain alleged 
causes. After the war had lasted some years, the president, with 
the advice of the senate, appointed ministers to treat of peace ; 
and he gave them such instructions as he saw fit. Now, as the 
war was declared by congress, and w T as waged to obtain certain 
ends, it would have been plausible to say that congress ought to 
know the instructions under which peace was to be negotiated, 
that they might see whether the objects for which the war was de- 
clared had been abandoned. Yet no such claim was set up. The 
president gave instructions, such as his judgment dictated, and 
neither house asserted any right of interference. 

Sir, there are gentlemen in this house, opposed to this mission, 
who, I hope, will nevertheless consider this question of amend- 
ment on general constitutional grounds. They are gentlemen of 
much estimation in the community, likely, I hope, long to con- 
tinue in the public service ; and, I trust, they will well reflect on 
the effect of this amendment on the separate powers and duties of 
the several departments of the government. 

An honorable member from Pennsylvania (Mr. Hemphill) has 
alluded to a resolution introduced by me the session before the last. 
I should not have referred to it myself, had he not invited the ref- 
erence ; but I am happy in the opportunity of showing how that 
resolution coincides with every thing which I say to-day. What 



ON THE PANAMA MISSION 



387 



was that resolution ? When an interesting people were struggling 
for national existence against a barbarous despotism, when there 
were good hopes (hopes, yet, I trust, to be fully realized) of 
their success, and when the holy alliance had pronounced against 
them certain false and abominable doctrines, I moved the house to 
resolve — what ? Simply that provision ought to be made by law 
to defray the expense of an agent or commissioner to that country, 
whenever the president should deem it expedient to make such 
appointment. Did I propose any instruction to the president, or 
any limit on his discretion ? None at all, sir ; none at all. What 
resemblance then can be found between that resolution and this 
amendment ? Let those who think any such resemblance exists, 
adopt, if they will, the words of the resolution, as a substitute for 
this amendment. We shall gladly take them. 

I am, therefore, Mr. Chairman, against the amendment; not 
only as not being a proper manner of exercising any power be- 
longing to this house, but also as not containing instructions fit to 
be given, if we possessed the power of giving them. And as my 
vote will rest on these grounds, I might terminate my remarks 
here ; but the discussion has extended over a broader surface, and, 
following where others have led, I will ask your indulgence to a 
few observations on the more general topics of the debate. 

Mr. Chairman, it is our fortune to be called upon to act our 
part, as public men, at a most interesting era in human affairs. 
The short period of your life, and of mine, has been thick and 
crowded with the most important events. Not only new interests 
and new relations have sprung up among states, but new societies, 
new nations and families of nations have risen to take their places, 
and perform their parts, in the order and the intercourse of the 
world. Every man aspiring to the character of a statesman, must 
endeavor to enlarge his views to meet this new state of things. 
He must aim at adequate comprehension, and instead of being sat- 
isfied with that narrow political sagacity, which, like the power of 
minute vision, sees small things accurately, but can see nothing 
else, he must look to the far horizon, and embrace, in his broad 
survey, whatever the series of recent events has brought into con- 
nection, near or remote, with the country whose interests he 
studies to serve. We have seen eight states, formed out of colo- 
nies on our own continent, assume the rank of nations. 

This is a mighty revolution ; and when we consider what an ex- 
tent of the surface of the globe they cover ; through what climates 
they extend ; what population they contain, and what new impulses 
they must derive from this change of government, — we cannot but 
perceive that great effects are likely to be produced on the in- 
tercourse and the interests of a civilized world. Indeed, it has 
been forcibly said, by the intelligent and distinguished statesman 



MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH 



who conducts the foreign relations of England, that when we now 
speak of Europe and the world, we mean Europe and America ; 
and that the different systems of these two portions of the globe, 
and their several and various interests, must be thoroughly studied 
and nicely balanced by the statesmen of the times. 

In many respects, sir, the European and the American nations 
are alike. They are alike Christian states, civilized states, and 
commercial states. They have access to the same common foun- 
tains of intelligence ; they all draw from those sources which 
belong to the whole civilized world. In knowledge and letters — 
in the arts of peace and war — they differ in degrees ; but they bear, 
nevertheless, a general resemblance. On the other hand, in mat- 
ters of government and social institution, the nations on this 
continent are founded upon principles which never did prevail, in 
considerable extent, either at any other time, or in any other place. 
There has never been presented to the mind of man a more inter- 
esting subject of contemplation than the establishment of so many 
nations in America, partaking in the civilization and in the arts of 
the old world, but having left behind them those cumbrous institu- 
tions which had their origin in a dark and military age. Whatsoever 
European experience has developed favorable to the freedom and 
the happiness of man ; whatsoever European genius has invented 
for his improvement or gratification ; whatsoever of refinement or 
polish the culture of European society presents for his adoption 
and enjoyment, — all this is offered to man in America, with the 
additional advantages of the full power of erecting forms of 
government on free and simple principles, without overturning 
institutions suited to times long passed, but too strongly supported, 
either by interests or prejudices, to be shaken without convulsions. 
This unprecedented state of things presents the happiest of all 
occasions for an attempt to establish national intercourse upon im- 
proved principles ; upon principles tending to peace and the 
mutual prosperity of nations. In this respect America, the whole 
of America, has a new career before her. If we look back on the 
history of Europe, we see 4 how great a portion of the last two 
centuries her states have been at war for interests connected 
mainly with her feudal monarchies ; wars for particular dynasties ; 
wars to support or defeat particular successions ; wars to enlarge 
or curtail the dominions of particular crowns ; wars to support or 
to dissolve family alliances ; wars, in fine, to enforce or to resist 
religious intolerance. What long and bloody chapters do these 
not fill, in the history of European politics ! Who does not see, 
and who does not rejoice to see, that America has a glorious 
chance of. escaping, at least, these causes of contention ? Who 
does not see, and who does not rejoice to see, that, on this conti- 
nent, under other forms of government, we have before us the no- 



ON THE PANAMA MISSION. 



389 



ble hope of being able, by the mere influence of civil liberty and 
religious toleration, to dry up these outpouring fountains of blood, 
and to extinguish these consuming fires of war. The general 
opinion of the age favors such hopes and such prospects. There 
is a growing disposition to treat the intercourse of nations more 
like the useful intercourse of friends ; philosophy — just views of 
national advantage, good sense, and the dictates of a common reli- 
gion, and an increasing conviction that w r ar is not the interest of 
the human race — all concur to increase the interest created by 
this new accession to the list of nations. 

We have heard it said, sir, that the topic of South American 
independence is worn out, and threadbare. Such it may be, sir, 
to those who have contemplated it merely as an article of news, 
like the fluctuation of the markets, or the rise and fall of stocks. 
Such it may be, to those minds who can see no consequences 
following from these great events. But whoever has either under- 
stood their present importance, or can at all estimate their future 
influence ; whoever has reflected on the new relations they intro- 
duce with other states; whoever, among ourselves especially, has 
meditated on the new relations which we now bear to them, and 
the striking attitude in which we ourselves are now placed, as the 
oldest of the American nations, will feel that the topic can never 
be without interest, and will be sensible that, whether we are wise 
enough to perceive it or not, the establishment of South American 
independence will affect all nations, and ourselves perhaps more 
than any other, through all coming time. 

But, sir, although the independence of these new states seems 
effectually accomplished, yet a lingering and hopeless war is kept 
up against them by Spain. This is greatly to be regretted by all 
nations. To Spain it is, as every reasonable man sees, useless, 
and without hope. To the new states themselves it is burdensome 
and afflictive. To the commerce of neutral nations it is annoying 
and vexatious. There seems to be something of the pertinacity 
of the Spanish character in holding on in such a desperate course. 
It reminds us of the seventy years during which Spain resisted the 
independence of Holland. I think, however, that there is some 
reason to believe that the war approaches to its end. I believe 
that the measures adopted by our own government have had an 
effect in tending to produce that result. I understand, at least, 
that the question of recognition has been taken into consideration 
by the Spanish government ; and it may be hoped that a w T 'ar, 
which Spain finds to be so expensive, which the whole world tells 
her is so hopeless, and which, if continued, now threatens her with 
new dangers, she may, ere long, have the prudence to terminate. 

Our own course, during this contest between Spain and her 
colonies, is well known. Though entirely and strictly neutral, 
03* 



390 



MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH 



we were in favor of early recognition. Our opinions were known 
to the allied sovereigns when in congress at Aix-la-Chapelle, in 
1818, at which time the affairs of Spain and her colonies were 
under consideration ; and, probably, the knowledge of those senti- 
ments, together with the policy adopted by England, prevented 
any interference by other powers at that time. Yet we have 
treated Spain with scrupulous delicacy. We acted on the case as 
one of civil war. We treated with the new governments as govern- 
ments de facto. Not questioning the right of Spain to coerce them 
back to their old obedience, if she had the power, we yet held it 
to be our right to deal with them as with existing governments in 
fact, when the moment arrived at which it became apparent and 
manifest that the dominion of Spain over these, her ancient colo- 
nies, was at an end. Our right, our interest, and our duty, all 
concurred at that moment to recommend recognition — and we did 
recognize. 

Now, sir, the history of this proposed congress goes back to an 
earlier date than that of our recognition. It commenced in 1821 ; 
and one of the treaties now before us, proposing such a meeting, 
that between Colombia and Chili, was concluded in July, 1822, a 
few months only after we had acknowledged the independence of 
the new states. The idea originated, doubtless, in the wish to 
strengthen the union among the new governments, and to promote 
the common cause of all, the effectual resistance to Spanish 
authority. As independence was at that time their leading object, 
it is natural to suppose that they contemplated this mode of mutual 
intercourse and mutual arrangement, as favorable to the necessary 
concentration of purpose, and of action, for the attainment of that 
object. But this purpose of the congress, or this leading idea, in 
w T hich it may be supposed to have originated, has led, as it seems 
to me, to great misapprehensions as to its true character, and great 
mistakes in regard to the danger to be apprehended from our 
sending ministers to the meeting. This meeting, sir, is a congress ; 
not a congress as the word is known to our constitution and laws, 
for we use it in a peculiar sense ; but as it is known to the law 
of nations. A congress, by the law of nations, is but an appointed 
meeting for the settlement of affairs between different nations, in 
which the representatives or agents of each treat and negotiate as 
they are instructed by their own government. In other words, 
this congress is a diplomatic meeting. We are asked to join no 
government, no legislature, no league, acting by votes. It is a 
congress such as those of Westphalia, of Nimeguen, of Ryswyck, 
or of Utrecht ; or such as those which have been holden in Europe 
in our own time. No nation is a party to any thing done in such 
assemblies, to which it does not expressly make itself a party. 
No one's rights are put at the disposition of any of the rest, or of 



ON THE PANAMA MISSION. 



391 



all the rest. What ministers agree to, being afterwards duly rati- 
fied at home, binds their government ; and nothing else binds the 
government. Whatsoever is done, to which they do not assent, 
neither binds the ministers nor their government, any more than if 
they had not been present. 

These truths, sir, seem too plain and too common-place to be 
stated. I find my apology only in those misapprehensions of the 
character of the meeting to which I have referred both now and 
formerly. It has been said that commercial treaties are not nego- 
tiated at such meetings. Far otherwise is the fact. Among the 
earliest of important stipulations made in favor of commerce and 
navigation, were those at Westphalia. And what we call the 
treaty of Utrecht was a bundle of treaties, negotiated at that con- 
gress ; some of peace, some of boundary, and others of commerce. 
Again, it has been said, in order to prove that this meeting is a 
sort of confederacy, that such assemblies are out of the way of 
ordinary negotiation, and are always founded on, and provided for, 
by previous treaties. Pray, sir, what treaty preceded the congress 
at Utrecht ? and the meeting of our plenipotentiaries with those 
of England at Ghent, what was that but a congress ? and what 
treaty preceded it ? It is said, again, that there is no sovereign to 
whom our ministers can be accredited. Let me ask whether, in 
the case last cited, our ministers exhibited their credentials to the 
mayor of Ghent? Sir, the practice of nations in these matters, is 
well known, and is free of difficulty. If the government be not 
present, agents or plenipotentiaries interchange their credentials. 
And when it is said that our ministers at Panama will be, not 
ministers, but deputies, members of a deliberative body, not pro- 
tected in their public character by the public law; when all this is 
said, propositions are advanced, of which I see no evidence what- 
ever, and which appear to me to be wholly without foundation. 

It is contended that this congress, by virtue of the treaties which 
the new states have entered into, will possess powers other than 
those of a diplomatic character, as between those new states them- 
selves. If that were so, it would be unimportant to us. The real 
question here is, What will be our relation with those states, by 
sending ministers to this congress ? Their arrangements among 
themselves will not affect us. Even if it were a government like 
our old confederation, yet, if its members had authority to treat 
with us in behalf of their respective nations on subjects on which 
we have a right to treat, the congress might still be a very proper 
occasion for such negotiations. Do gentlemen forget that the 
French minister was introduced to our old congress, met it in its 
sessions, carried on oral discussions with it, and treated with it in 

behalf of the French kino- ? All that did not make him a member 

. . . 

of it, nor connect him at all with the relations which its members 



392 



MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH 



bore to each other. As he treated on the subject of carrying on 
the war against England, it was, doubtless, hostile towards that 
power ; but this consequence followed from the object and nature 
of the stipulations, and not from the manner of the intercourse. 
The representatives of these South American states, it is said, 
will carry on belligerent councils at this congress. Be it so ; we 
shall not join in such councils. At the moment of invitation, 
our government informed the ministers of those states, that we 
could not make ourselves a party to the war between them and 
Spain, nor to councils for deliberating on the means of its further 
prosecution. 

If, it is asked, we send ministers to a congress composed altogeth- 
er of belligerents, is it not a breach of neutrality ? Certainly not : 
no man can say it is. Suppose, sir, that these ministers from the 
new states, instead of Panama, were to assemble at Bogota, where 
we already have a minister ; their councils, at that place, might be 
belligerent, while the war should last with Spain. But should 
we, on that account, recall our minister from Bogota? The 
whole argument rests on this ; that because, at the same time and 
place, the agents of the South American governments may nego- 
tiate about their own relations with each other, in regard to their 
common war against Spain, therefore we cannot, at the same time 
and place, negotiate with them, or any of them, upon our own 
neutral and commercial relations. This proposition, sir, cannot 
be maintained, and, therefore, all the inferences from it fail. 

But, sir, I see no proof that, as between themselves, the repre- 
sentatives of the South American states are to possess other than 
diplomatic powers. I refer to the treaties, which are essentially 
alike, and which have been often read. 

With two exceptions (which I will notice), the articles of these 
treaties, describing the powers of the congress, are substantially 
jke those in the treaty of Paris, in 1814, providing for the con- 
gress of Vienna. It was there stipulated that all the powers 
should send plenipotentiaries to Vienna, to regulate, in general 
congress, the arrangements to complete the provisions of the pres- 
ent treaty. Now, it might have been here asked, how regulate ? 
How regulate in general congress ? — regulate by votes ? Sir, 
nobody asked such questions, simply because it was to be a 
congress of plenipotentiaries. The two exceptions which I have 
mentioned are, that this congress is to act as a council and to 
interpret treaties ; but there is nothing in either of these to be 
done which may not be done diplomatically. What is more com- 
mon than diplomatic intercourse, to explain and to interpret treaties ? 
Or what more frequent than that nations, having a common object, 
interchange mutual counsels and advice, through the medium of 
their respective ministers ? To bring this matter, sir, to the test, 



ON THE PANAMA MISSION. 



393 



let me ask, when these ministers assemble at Panama, can they do 
aiy th ng but according to their instructions? Have they any or- 
guiizat 01, any power of action, or any rule of action common to 
them all ? No more, sir, than the respective ministers at the con- 
gress of Vienna. Every thing is settled by the use of the word 
plenipotentiary. That proves the meeting to be diplomatic, and 
nothing else. Who ever heard of a plenipotentiary member of. 
the legislature ? — a plenipotentiary burgess of a city ? — or a pleni- 
potentiary knight of the shire ? 

We may dismiss all fears, sir, arising from the nature of this 
meeting. Our agents will go there, if they go at all, in the char- 
acter of ministers, protected by the public law, negotiating only for 
ourselves, and not called on to violate any neutral duty of their 
own government. If it be so that this meeting has other powers, 
in consequence of other arrangements between other states, of 
which I see no proof, still we are not party to these arrangements, 
nor can be in any way affected by them. As far as this govern- 
ment is concerned, nothing can be done but by negotiation, as in 
other cases. 

It has been affirmed that this measure, and the sentiments ex- 
pressed by the executive relative to its objects, are an acknowl- 
edged departure from the neutral policy of the United States. 
Sir, I deny there is an acknowledged departure, or any departure 
at all, from the neutral policy of the country. What do we mean 
by our neutral policy ? Not, I suppose, a blind and stupid indif- 
ference to whatever is passing around us ; not a total disregard to 
approaching events, or approaching evils, till they meet us full in 
the face. Nor do we mean, by our neutral policy, that we intend 
never to assert our rights by force. No, sir. We mean, by our 
policy of neutrality, that the great objects of national pursuit with 
us are connected with peace. We covet no provinces ; we desire 
no conquest ; we entertain no ambitious projects of aggrandize- 
ment by war. This is our policy. But it does not follow, from 
this, that we rely less than other nations on our own power to vin- 
dicate our own rights. We know that the last logic of kings is 
also our last logic ; that our own interests must be defended and 
maintained by our own arm ; and that peace or war may not al- 
ways be of our own choosing. Our neutral policy, therefore, not 
only justifies, but requires our anxious attention to the political 
events which take place in the world, a skilful perception of their 
relation to our own concerns, an early anticipation of their conse- 
quences, and firm and timely assertion of what we hold to be our 
own rights, and our own interests. Our neutrality is not a prede- 
termined abstinence, either from remonstrances or from force. 
Our neutral policy is a policy that protects neutrality, that defends 
neutrality, that takes up arms, if need be, for neutrality. When 

Ddd 



394 



MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH 



it is said, therefore, that this measure departs from our neutral pol- 
icy, either that policy, or the measure itself, is misunderstood. 
It implies either that the object or the tendency of the measure 
is to involve us in the war of other states, which I think cannot be 
shown, or that the assertion of our own sentiments, on points af- 
fecting deeply our own interests, may place us in a hostile attitude 
with other states, and that, therefore, we depart from neutrality ; 
whereas the truth is, that the decisive assertion, and the firm sup- 
port of these sentiments, may be most essential to the mainte- 
nance of neutrality. 

An honorable member from Pennsylvania thinks this congress 
will bring a dark day over the United States. Doubtless, sir, it is 
an interesting moment in our history ; but I see no great proofs of 
thick-coming darkness. But the object of the remark seemed to 
be to show that the president himself saw difficulties on all sides, 
and, making a choice of evils, preferred rather to send ministers to 
this congress, than to run the risk of exciting the hostility of the 
states by refusing to send. In other words, the gentleman wished 
to prove that the president intended an alliance ; although such 
intention is expressly disclaimed. 

Much commentary has been bestowed on the letters of invita- 
tion from the ministers. I shall not go through with verbal criti- 
cisms on these letters. Their general import is plain enough. I 
shall not gather together small and minute quotations, taking a sen- 
tence here, a word there, and a syllable in a third place, dovetail- 
ing them into the course of remark, till the printed discourse bris- 
tles with inverted commas, in every line, like a harvest-field. I 
look to the general tenor of the invitations, and I find that we are 
asked to take part only in such things as concern ourselves. I 
look still more carefully to the answers, and I see every proper 
caution, and proper guard. I look to the message, and I see 
that nothing is there contemplated, likely to involve us in other 
men's quarrels, or that may justly give offence to any foreign 
state. With this, I am satisfied. 

I must now ask the indulgence of the committee to an important 
point in the discussion : I mean the declaration of the president 
in 1823. Not only as a member of the house, but as a citizen of 
the country, I have an anxious desire that this part of our public 
history should stand in its proper light. Sir, in my judgment the 
country has a very high honor, connected with that occurrence, 
which we may maintain, or which we may sacrifice. I look upon 
it as a part o f its treasures of reputation, and, for one, I intend to 
guard it. 

Sir, let us recur to the important political events which led to 
that declaration, or accompanied it. In the fall of 1822, the allied 
sovereigns held their congress at Verona. The great subject of 



ON THE PANAMA MISSION. 



395 



consideration was the condition of Spain, that country then being 
under the government of the Cortes. The question was, whether 
Ferdinand should be reinstated in all his authority, by the inter- 
vention of foreign force. Russia, Prussia, France, and Austria, 
were inclined to that measure ; England dissented and protested ; 
but the course was agreed on, and France, with the consent of 
these other continental powers, took the conduct of the operation 
into her own hands. In the spring of 1823, a French army was 
sent into Spain. Its success was complete. The popular govern- 
ment was overthrown, and Ferdinand reestablished in all his power. 
This invasion, sir, was determined on, and undertaken, precisely 
on the doctrines which the allied monarchs had proclaimed the 
year before, at Laybach ; and that is, that they had a right to in- 
terfere in the concerns of another state, and reform its government, 
in order to prevent the effects of its bad example ; this bad 
example, be it remembered, always being the example of free 
government. Now, sir, acting on this principle of supposed dan- 
gerous example, and having put down the example of the Cortes 
in Spain, it was natural to inquire with what eyes they would look 
on the colonies of Spain, that were following still worse examples. 
Would king Ferdinand and his allies be content with what had 
been done in Spain itself, or would he solicit their aid, and was it 
likely they would grant it, to subdue his rebellious American 
provinces ? 

Sir, it was in this posture of affairs, on an occasion which has 
already been alluded to, that I ventured to say, early in the ses- 
sion of December, 1823, that these allied monarchs might possibly 
turn their attention to America ; that America came within their 
avowed doctrine, and that her examples might very possibly attract 
their notice. The doctrines of Laybach were not limited to any 
continent ; Spain had colonies in America, and having reformed 
Spain herself to the true standard, it was not impossible that they 
might see fit to complete the work by reconciling, in their way, the 
colonies to the mother country. Now, sir, it did so happen, that 
as soon as the Spanish king was completely reestablished, he did 
invite the cooperation of his allies, in regard to South America. 
In the same month of December, of 1823, a formal invitation was 
addressed by Spain to the courts of St. Petersburg, Vienna, Berlin, 
and Paris, proposing to establish a conference at Paris, in order 
that the plenipotentiaries, there assembled, might aid Spain in 
adjusting the affairs of her revolted provinces. These affairs were 
proposed to be adjusted in such manner as should retain the sove- 
reignty of Spain over them ; and though the cooperation of the 
allies, by force of arms, was not directly solicited, such was ev--. 
dently the object aimed at. 

The king of Spain, in making this request to the members of 



396 



MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH 



the Holy Alliance, argued, as it had been seen he might argue. 
He quoted their own doctrines of Laybach ; he pointed out the 
pernicious example of America ; and he reminded them that their 
success, in Spain itself, had paved the way for successful operations 
against the spirit of liberty on this side the Atlantic. 

The proposed meeting, however, did not take place. England 
had already taken a decided course ; for, as early as October, Mr. 
Canning, in a conference with the French minister in London, 
informed him, distinctly and expressly, that England would consider 
any foreign interference, by force or by menace, in the dispute 
between Spain and the colonies, as a motive for recognizing the 
latter, without delay. 

It is probable this determination of the English government was 
known here, at the commencement of the session of congress ; 
and it was under these circumstances, it was in this crisis, that 
Mr. Monroe's declaration was made. It was not then ascertained 
whet her a meeting of the allies would, or would not, take place, to 
concert with Spain the means of reestablishing her power ; but it 
was plain enough they would be pressed by Spain to aid her oper- 
ations ; and it was plain enough, also, that they had no particular 
liking to what was taking place on this side the Atlantic, nor any 
great disinclination to interfere. This was the posture of affairs ; 
and, sir, I concur entirely in the sentiment expressed in the reso- 
lution of a gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Markley), that this 
declaration of Mr. Monroe was wise, seasonable, and patriotic. 

It has been said, in the course of this debate, to have been a 
loose and vague declaration. It was, I believe, sufficiently studied. 
I have understood, from good authority, that it was considered, 
weighed, and distinctly and decidedly approved by every one of 
the president's advisers at that time. Our government could not 
adopt, on that occasion, precisely the course which England had 
taken. England threatened the immediate recognition of the 
provinces, if the allies should take part with Spain against them. 
We had already recognized them. It remained, therefore, only 
for our government to say how we should consider a combination 
of the allied powers, to effect objects in America, as affecting our- 
selves ; and the message was intended to say, what it does say, 
that we should regard such combination as dangerous to us. Sir, 
I agree with those who maintain the proposition, and I contend 
against those who deny it, that the message did mean something ; 
that it meant much ; and I maintain, against both, that the decla- 
ration effected much good, answered the end designed by it, did 
great honor to the foresight and the spirit of the government, and 
that it cannot now be taken back, retracted, or annulled, without 
disgrace. It met, sir, with the entire concurrence and the hearty 
approbation of the country. The tone which it uttered found a 



ON THE PANAMA MISSION. 



397 



corresponding response in the breasts of the free people of the 
United States. That people saw, and they rejoiced to see, that, 
on a fit occasion, our weight had been thrown into the right scale, 
and that, without departing from bur duty, we had done something 
useful, and something effectual, for the cause of civil liberty. One 
general glow of exultation — one universal feeling of the gratified 
love of liberty — one conscious and proud perception of the con- 
sideration which the country possessed, and of the respect and 
honor which belonged to it — pervaded all bosoms. Possibly the 
public enthusiasm went too far ; it certainly did go far. But, sir, 
the sentiment which this declaration inspired was not confined to 
ourselves. Its force was felt every where, by all those .who could 
understand its object, and foresee its effect. In that very house 
of commons, of which the gentleman from South Carolina has 
spoken with such commendation, how was it there received ? 
Not only, sir, with approbation, but, I may say, with no little en- 
thusiasm. While the leading minister expressed his entire con- 
currence in the sentiments and opinions of the American president, 
his distinguished competitor in that popular body, less restrained by 
official decorum, more at liberty to give utterance to the feeling of 
the occasion, declared that no event had ever created greater joy, 
exultation, and gratitude, among all the freemen in Europe ; that 
he felt pride in being connected, by blood and language, with the 
people of the United States : that the policy disclosed by the mes- 
sage became a great, a free, and an independent nation ; and that 
he hoped his own country would be prevented by no mean pride, 
or paltry jealousy, from following so noble and glorious an ex- 
ample. 

It is doubtless true, as 1 took occasion to observe the other day, 
that this declaration must be considered as founded on our rights, 
and to spring mainly from a regard to their preservation. It did 
not commit us at all events to take up arms, on any indication of 
hostile feeling by the powers of Europe towards South America. 
If, for example, all the states of Europe had refused to trade with 
South America, until her states should return to their former alle- 
giance, that would have furnished no cause of interference to us. 
Or, if an armament had been furnished bv the allies to act against 
provinces the most remote from us, as Chili or Buenos Ayre?, the 
distance of the scene of action diminishing our apprehension of 
danger, and diminishing also our means of effectual interposition, 
might still have left us to content ourselves with remonstrance. 
But a very different case would have arisen, if an army, equipped 
and maintained by these powers, had been landed on the shores 
of the gulf of Mexico, and commenced the war in our own im- 
mediate neighborhood. Such an event might justly be regarded 
as dangerous to ourselves, and, on that ground, to have called for 
34 



398 



MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH 



decided and immediate interference by us. The sentiments and 
the policy announced by the declaration, thus understood, were, 
therefore, in strict conformity to our duties and our interest. 

Sir, I look on the message of December, 1823, as forming a 
bright page in our history. I will neither help to erase it, or tear 
it out : nor shall it be, by any act of mine, blurred or blotted. It 
did honor to the sagacity of the government, and I will not dimin- 
ish that honor. It elevated the hopes, and gratified the patriotism 
of the people. Over those hopes I will not bring a mildew; nor 
will I put that gratified patriotism to shame. 

But how should it happen, sir, that there should now be such a 
new-born fear, on the subject of this declaration? The crisis is 
over ; the danger is past. At the time it was made, there was 
real ground for apprehension : now there is none. It was then 
possible, perhaps not improbable, that the allied powers might in- 
terfere with America. There is now no ground for any such fear. 
Most of the gentlemen, who have now spoken on the subject, 
were at that time here. They all heard the declaration. Not 
one of them complained. And yet, now, when all danger is 
over, we are vehemently warned against the sentiments of the 
declaration. 

To avoid this apparent inconsistency, it is, however, contended, 
that new force has been recently given to this declaration. But 
of this, I see no evidence whatever. I see nothing in any instruc- 
tions or communications from our government changing the char- 
acter of that declaration in any degree. There is, as I have be- 
fore said, in one of Mr. Poinsett's letters, an inaccuracy of ex- 
pression. If he has recited correctly his conversation with the 
Mexican minister, he did go too far ; farther than any instructions 
warranted. But, taking his whole correspondence together, it is 
quite manifest that he has deceived nobody, nor has he committed 
the country. On the subject of a pledge, he put the Mexican 
minister entirely right. He stated to him, distinctly, that this 
government had given no pledge which others could call upon it 
to redeem. What could be more explicit? Again, sir: it is 
plain that Mexico thought us under no greater pledge than Eng- 
land ; for the letters to the English and American ministers, re- 
questing interference, were in precisely the same words. When 
this passage in Mr. Poinsett's letter was first noticed, we were as- 
sured there was and must be some other authority for it. It was 
confidently said he had instructions, authorizing it, in his pocket. 
It turns out otherwise. As little ground is there to complain of 
any thing in the secretary's letter to Mr. Poinsett. It seems to 
me to be precisely what it should be. It does not, as has been 
alleged, propose any cooperation between the government of Mex- 
ico and our own. Nothing 1 ke it. It instructs our ministers to 



ON THE PANAMA MISSION. 



399 



bring to the notice of the Mexican government the line of policy 
which we have marked out for ourselves — acting on our own 
grounds, and for our own interests ; and to suggest to that govern- 
ment, acting on its own ground, and for its own interests, the pro- 
priety of following a similar course. Here, sir, is no alliance, nor 
even any cooperation. 

So, again, as to the correspondence which refers to the appear- 
ance of the French fleet in the West India seas. Be it remem- 
bered, that our government was contending, in the course of this 
correspondence with Mexico, for an equality in matters of com- 
merce. It insisted on being placed, in this respect, on the same 
footing as the other South American states. To enforce this 
claim, our known friendly sentiments towards Mexico, as well as 
to the rest of the new states, were suggested — and properly sug- 
gested. Mexico was reminded of the timely declaration which 
had been made of these sentiments. She was reminded that she 
herself had been well inclined to claim the benefit resulting from 
that declaration, when a French fleet appeared in the neighboring 
seas ; and she was referred to the course adopted by our govern- 
ment on that occasion, with an intimation, that she might learn 
from it how the same government would have acted if other pos- 
sible contingencies had happened. What is there, in all this, of 
any renewed pledge, or what is there of any thing beyond the 
true line of our policy ? Do gentlemen mean to say, that the 
communication made to France, on this occasion, was improper ? 
Do they mean to repel and repudiate that declaration ? That dec- 
laration was, that we could not see Cuba transferred from Spain 
to another European power. If the house mean to contradict 
that — be it so. If it do not, then, as the government had acted 
properly in this case, it did furnish ground to believe it would act 
properly, also, in other cases, when they arose. And the ref- 
erence to this incident or occurrence by the secretary, was perti- 
nent to the argument which he was pressing on the Mexican gov- 
ernment. 

I have but a word to say on the subject of the declaration 
against European colonization in America. The late president 
seems to have thought the occasion used by him for that purpose 
to be a proper one for the open avowal of a principle which had 
already been acted upon. Great and practical inconveniences, it 
was feared, might be apprehended, from the establishment of new 
colonies in America, having a European origin and a European 
connection. Attempts of that kind, it was obvious, might possi- 
bly be made, amidst the changes that were taking place, in Mexi- 
co, as well as in the more southern states. Mexico bounds us, on 
a vast length of line, from the gulf of Mexico to the Pacific 
ocean. There are many reasons why it should not be desired by 



400 



MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH 



us, that an establishment, under the protection of a difTeiem povr* 
er, should occupy any portion of that space. We have a general 
interest, that through all the vast territories rescued from the do- 
minion of Spain, our commerce might find its way, protected by 
treaties with governments existing on the spot. These views, and 
others of a similar character, rendered it highly desirable to us, 
that these new states should settle it, as a part of their policy, not 
to allow colonization within their respective territories. True, in- 
deed, we did not need their aid to assist us in maintaining such a 
course for ourselves ; but we had an interest in their assertion and 
support of the principle as applicable to their own territories. 

I now proceed, Mr. Chairman, to a few remarks on the subject 
of Cuba, the most important point of our foreign relations. It is 
the hinge on which interesting events may possibly turn. I pray 
gentlemen to review their opinions on this subject before they ful- 
ly commit themselves. I understood the honorable member from 
South Carolina to say, that if Spain chose to transfer this island to 
any power in Europe, she had a right to do so, and we could 
not interfere to prevent it. Sir, this is a delicate subject. I hard- 
ly feel competent to treat it as it deserves ; and I am not quite 
willing to state here all that I think about it. I must, however, 
dissent from the opinion of the gentleman from South Carolina. 
The right of nations, on subjects of this kind, are necessarily very 
much modified by circumstances. Because England or France 
could not rightfully complain of the transfer of Florida to us, it by 
no means follows, as the gentleman supposes, that we could not 
complain of the cession of Cuba to one of them. The plain dif- 
ference is, that the transfer of Florida to us was not dangerous to 
the safety of either of those nations, nor fatal to any of their great 
and essential interests. Proximity of position, neighborhood, 
whatever augments the power of injuring and annoying, very 
properly belong to the consideration of all cases of this kind. The 
greater or less facility of access itself is of consideration in such 
questions, because it brings, or may bring, weighty consequences 
with it. It justifies, for these reasons, and on these grounds, what 
otherwise might never be thought of. By negotiation with a for- 
eign power, Mr. Jefferson obtained a province. Without any al- 
teration of our constitution, we have made it part of the United 
States, and its senators and representatives, now coming from sev 
eral states,, are here among us. Now, sir, if, instead of being 
Louisiana, this had been one of the provinces of Spain proper, or 
one of her South American colonies, he must have been a mad 
man, that should have proposed such an acquisition. A high con- 
viction of its convenience, arising from proximity, and from clos# 
natural connection, alone reconciled the country to the measure* 
Considerations of the same sort have weight in other cases. 



ON THE PANAMA MISSION. 



401 



An honorable member from Kentucky (Mr. WicklifFe) ar- 
gues, that although we might rightfully prevent another power 
from taking Cuba from Spain, by force, yet if Spain should choose 
to make the voluntary transfer, we should have no right whatever 
to interfere. Sir, this is a distinction without a difference. If we 
are likely to have contention about Cuba, let us first well consider 
what our rights are, and not commit ourselves. And, sir, if we 
have any right to interfere at all, it applies as well to the case of 
a peaceable, as to that of a forcible transfer. If nations be at 
war, we are not judges of the question of right, in that war ; we 
must acknowledge, in both parties, the mutual right of attack, and 
the mutual right of conquest. It is not for us to set bounds to 
their belligerent operations, so long as they do not affect ourselves. 
Our right to interfere, sir, in any such case, is but the exercise of 
the right of reasonable and necessary self-defence. It is a high 
and delicate exercise of that right ; one not to be made but on 
grounds of strong and manifest reason, justice and necessity. The 
real question is, whether the possession of Cuba by a great mari 
time power of Europe, would seriously endanger our own imme- 
diate security, or our essential interests. I put the question, sir, 
in the language of some of the best considered state papers oi 
modern times. The general rule of national law is, unquestiona- 
bly, against interference in the transactions of other states. There 
are, however, acknowledged exceptions, growing out of circum- 
stances, and founded in those circumstances. These exceptions, 
it has been properly said, cannot, without danger, be reduced to 
previous rule, and incorporated into the ordinary diplomacy of na 
tions. Nevertheless, they do exist, and must be judged of, when 
they arise, with a just regard to our own essential interests, but in 
a spirit of strict justice and delicacy also towards foreign states. 

The ground of these exceptions is, as I have already stated, 
self-preservation. It is not a slight injury to our interest ; it is not 
even a great inconvenience, that makes out a case. There must 
be danger to our security, or danger, manifest and imminent dan- 
ger, to our essential rights, and our essential interests. Now, sir, 
let us look at Cuba. I need hardly refer to its present amount of 
commercial connection with the United States. Our statistical ta- 
bles, I presume, would show us, that our commerce with the Ha- 
vanna alone is more in amount than our whole commercial inter- 
course with France and all her dependencies. But this is but one 
part of the case, and not the most important. Cuba, as is well 
said in the report of the committee of foreign affairs, is placed in 
the mouth of the Mississippi. Its occupation by a strong mari- 
time power would be felt, in the first moment, of hostility, as far 
up the Mississippi and the Missouri, as cur population extends. 
It is the commanding point of the gulf of Mexico. See, too, 
34* Eee 



402 



MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH 



how it lies in the very line of our coastwise traffic ; interposed in 
the very highway between New York and New Orleans. 

Now, sir, who has estimated, or who can estimate, the effect of 
a change, which should place this island in other hands, subject it 
to new rules of commercial intercourse, or connect it with objects 
of a different and still more dangerous nature ? Sir, I repeat that 
I feel no disposition to pursue this topic, on the present occasion. 
My purpose is only to show its importance, and to beg gentlemen 
not to prejudice any rights of the country by assenting to propo- 
sitions, which, perhaps, may be necessary to be reviewed. 

And here I differ again with the gentleman from Kentucky. 
He thinks that, in this, as in other cases, we should wait till the 
event comes, without any previous declaration of our sentiments 
upon subjects important to our own rights or our own interests. 
Sir, such declarations are often the appropriate means of prevent- 
ing that which, if unprevented, it might be difficult to redress. A 
great object in holding diplomatic intercourse, is frankly to expose 
the views and objects of nations, and to prevent, by candid expla- 
nation, collision and war. In this case, the government has said 
that we could not assent to the transfer of Cuba to another Euro- 
pean state. Can we so assent ? Do gentlemen think we can ? 
If not, then it was entirely proper that this intimation should be 
frankly and seasonably made. Candor required it ; and it would 
have been unpardonable, it would have been injustice, as well as 
folly, to have been silent, while we might suppose the transaction 
to be contemplated, and then to complain of it afterwards. If we 
should have a subsequent right to complain, we have a previous 
right, equally clear, of protesting ; and if the evil be one, which, 
when it comes, would allow us to apply a remedy, it not only al- 
lows us, but it makes it our duty, also, to apply prevention. 

But, sir, while some gentlemen have maintained, that on the 
subject of a transfer to any of the European powers, the presi- 
dent has said too much, others insist that on that of the islands 
being occupied by Mexico or Colombia, he has said and done too 
little. I presume, sir, for my own part, that the strongest lan- 
guage has been directed to the source of greatest danger. Here- 
tofore that danger was, doubtless, greatest, which was apprehend- 
ed from a voluntary transfer. The other has been met, as it 
arose, and, thus far, adequately and sufficiently met. And here, 
sir, I cannot but say that I never knew a more extraordinary ar- 
gument than we have heard on the conduct of the executive on 
this part of the case. The president is charged with inconsisten- 
cy ; and, in order to make this out, public despatches are read, 
which, it is said, militate with one another. 

Sir, what are the facts? This government saw fit to invite the 
emperor of Russia to use his endeavors to bring Spain to treat of 



ON THE PANAMA MISSION. 



403 



peace with her revolted colonies. Russia was addressed on this 
occasion as the friend of Spain ; and, of course, every argument 
which it was thought might have influence, or ought to have in- 
fluence, either on Russia or Spain, was suggested in the corre- 
spondence. Among other things, the probable loss to Spain, of 
Cuba and Puerto Rico, was urged ; and the question was asked, 
how it was, or could be expected by Spain, that the United States 
could interfere, to prevent Mexico and Colombia from taking those 
islands from her, since she was their enemy, in a public war, and 
since she pertinaciously, and unreasonably, as we think, insists on 
maintaining the war ; and since these islands offered an obvious 
object of attack ? W as not this, sir, a very proper argument to 
be urged to Spain? A copy of this despatch, it seems, was sent 
to the senate, in confidence. It has not been published by the 
executive. Now, the alleged inconsistency is, that, notwithstand- 
ing this letter, the president has interfered to dissuade Mexico 
and Colombia from attacking Cuba ; that, finding or thinking that 
those states meditated such a purpose, this government has urged 
them to desist from it. Sir, was ever any thing more unreasonable 
than this charge ? Was it not proper, that, to produce the desired 
result of peace, our government should address different motives 
to the different parties in the war ? Was it not its business to set 
before each party its dangers and its difficulties, in pursuing the 
war? And if, now, by any thing unexpected, these respective 
correspondences have become public, are these different views, 
addressed thus to different parties, and with different objects, to be 
relied on as proof of inconsistency ? It is the strangest accusa- 
tion ever heard of. No government, not wholly destitute of com- 
mon sense, would have acted otherwise. We urged the proper 
motives to both parties. To Spain we urged the probable loss of 
Cuba; we showed her the dangers of its capture by the new 
states ; and we asked her to inform us on what ground it was, that 
we could interfere to prevent such capture, since she was at war 
with these states, and they had an unquestionable right to attack 
her in any of her territories ; and especially she was asked how 
she could expect good offices from us, on this occasion, since she 
fully understood our opinion to be, that she was persisting in the 
war without, or beyond all reason, and with a sort of desperation. 
This was the appeal made to the good sense of Spain, through 
Russia. But, soon afterwards, having reason to suspect that Co 
lombia and Mexico were actually preparing to attack Cuba, and 
knowing that such an event would most seriously affect us, our 
government remonstrated against such meditated attack, and to the 
present time it has not been made. In all this, who sees any thing 
either improper or inconsistent ? For myself, I think the course 
pursued showed a watchful regard to our own interest, and is 



404 



MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH 



wholly free from any imputation, either of impropriety or inconsis- 
tency. 

There are other subjects, sir, in the president's message, which 
have been discussed in the debate, but on which I shall not detain 
the committee. 

It cannot be denied, that from the commencement of our gov- 
ernment, it has been its object to improve and simplify the princi- 
ples of national intercourse. It may well be thought a fit occasion 
to urge these improved principles, at a moment when so many new 
states are coming into existence, untrammelled, of course, with 
previous and long-established connections or habits. Some hopes 
of benefit, connected with these topics, are suggested in the 
message. 

The abolition of private war on the ocean is also among the 
subjects of possible consideration. This is not the first time that 
that subject has been mentioned. The late president took occa- 
sion to enforce the considerations which he thought recommended 
it. For one, I am not prepared to say how far such abolition 
may be practicable, or how far it ought to be pursued ; but there 
are views belonging to the subject, which have not been, m any 
degree, answered or considered in this discussion. 

Sir, it is not always the party that has the power of employing 
the largest military marine, that enjoys the advantage by authoriz- 
ing privateers in war. It is not enough that there are brave and 
gallant captors ; there must be something to be captured. Sup- 
pose, sir, a war between ourselves and any one of the new states 
of South America were now existing, who would lose most, by the 
practice of privateering, in such a war ? There would be nothing 
for us to attack ; while the means of attacking us would flow to 
our enemies from every part of the world. Capital, ships, and 
men, would be abundant in all their ports, and our commerce, 
spread over every sea, would be the destined prey. So, again, if 
war should unhappily spring up among those states themselves, 
might it not be for our interest, as being likely to be much con- 
nected by intercourse with all parties, that our commerce should 
be free from the visitation and search of private armed ships ; one 
of the greatest vexations to neutral commerce in time of war ? 
These, sir, are some of the considerations belonging to this subject. 
I have mentioned them only to show that they well deserve serious 
attention. 

I have not intended to reply to the many observations which 
have been submitted to us, on the message of the president to this 
house, or that to the senate. Certainly I am of opinion, that some 
of those observations merited an answer, and they have been an- 
swered by others. On two points only will I make a remark. It 
nas been said, and often repeated, that the president, in his mes- 



ON THE PANAMA MISSION. 



405 



sage to the senate, has spoken of his own power in regard to 
missions, in terms which the constitution does not warrant. If 
gentlemen will turn to the message of president Washington, 
relative to the mission to Lisbon, in the tenth volume of State 
Papers, they will see almost the exact form of expression used in 
this case. The other point on which I would make a remark, 
is the allegation that an unfair use has been made in the argu- 
ment of the message, of^eneral Washington's Farewell Address. 
There would be no end, sir, to comments and criticisms of this 
sort, if they were to be pursued. I only observe, that, as it 
appears to me, the argument of the message, and its use of the 
Farewell Address, are not fairly understood. It is not attempted 
to be inferred from the Farewell Address, that, according to the 
opinion of Washington, we ought now to have alliances with 
foreign states. No such thing. The Farewell Address recom- 
mends to us to abstain as much as possible from all sorts of 
political connection with the states of Europe, alleging, as the 
reason for this advice, that Europe has a set of primary inter- 
ests of her own, separate from ours, and with which we have no 
natural connection. Now the message argues, and argues truly, 
that the new South American states, not having a set of inter- 
ests of their own, growing out of the balance of power, family 
alliances, &cc, separate from ours, in the same manner and to the 
same degree as the primary interests of Europe were represented 
to be, this part of the Farewell Address, aimed at those separate 
interests expressly, did not apply in this case. But does the 
message infer from this the propriety of alliances with these new- 
states ? Far from it. It infers no such thing. On the contrary, 
it disclaims all such purpose. 

There is one other point, sir, on which common justice requires 
a word to be said. It has been alleged, that there are material 
differences as to the papers sent respectively to the two houses. 
All this, as it seems to me, may be easily and satisfactorily ex- 
plained. In the first place, the instructions of May, 1823, which, 
it is said, were not sent to the senate, were instructions on which 
a treaty had been already negotiated ; which treaty had been sub- 
sequently ratified by the senate. It may be presumed that, when 
the treaty was sent to the senate, the instructions accompanied it ; 
and if so, they were actually already before the senate ; and this 
accounts for one of the alleged differences. In the next place, 
the letter to Mr. Middleton, in Russia, not sent to the house, but 
now published by the senate, is such a paper as possibly the pres- 
ident might not think proper to make public. There is evident 
reason for such an inference. And, lastly, the correspondence of 
Mr. Brown, sent here, but not to the senate, appears, from its 
date, to have been received after the communication to the senate 



406 



MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH 



Probably when sent to us, it was also sent, by another messagej 
to that body. 

These observations, sir, are tedious and uninteresting. I am 
glad to be through with them. And here I might terminate my 
remarks, and relieve the patience, now long and heavily taxed, of 
the committee. But there is one part of the discussion, on which 
I must ask to be indulged with a few observations. 

Pains, sir, have been taken by the honorable member from Vir- 
ginia, to prove that the measure now in contemplation, and, indeed, 
the whole policy of the government respecting South America, is 
the unhappy result of the influence of a gentleman formerly filling 
the chair of this house. To make out this, he has referred to 
certain speeches of that gentleman delivered here. He charges 
him with having become himself affected at an early day with 
what he is pleased to call the South American fever, and with 
having infused its baneful influence into the whole councils of the 
country. 

If, sir, it be true, that that gentleman, prompted by an ardent 
love of civil liberty, felt, earlier than others, a proper sympathy 
for the struggling colonies of South America ; or that, acting on 
the maxim that revolutions do not go backward, he had the sa- 
gacity to foresee, earlier than others, the successful termination of 
those struggles ; if, thus feeling, and thus perceiving, it fell to him 
to lead the willing or unwilling councils of his country, in her 
manifestations of kindness to the new governments, and in her 
seasonable recognition of their independence ; if it be this which 
the honorable member imputes to him ; if it be by this course of 
public conduct that he has identified his name with the cause of 
South American liberty, — he ought to be esteemed one of the most 
fortunate men of the age. If ail this be, as is now represented, 
he has acquired fame enough. It is enough for any man thus to 
have connected himself with the greatest events of the as^e in 
which he lives, and to have been foremost in measures which 
reflect high honor on his country, in the judgment of mankind. 
Sir, it is always with great reluctance that I am drawn to speak, in 
my place here, of individuals ; but I could not forbear what I have 
now said, when I hear, in the house of representatives, and in 
this land of free spirits, that it is made matter of imputation and 
of reproach, to have been first to reach forth the hand of welcome 
and of succor to new-born nations, struggling to obtain and to 
enjoy the blessings of liberty. 

We are told that the country is deluded and deceived by caba- 
listic words. Cabalistic words ! If we express an emotion of 
pleasure at the results of this great action of the spirit of political 
liberty ; if we rejoice at the birth of new republican nations, and 
express our joy by the common terms of regard and sympathy ; 



ON THE PANAMA MISSION. 



407 



if we feel and signify high gratification that, throughout this whole 
continent, men are now likely to be blest by free and popular 
institutions ; and if, in the uttering of these sentiments, we happen 
to speak of sister republics — of the great American family of na- 
tions — or of the political system and forms of government of this 
hemisphere, — then, indeed, it seems we deal in senseless jargon, or 
impose on the judgment and feeling of the community by cabalistic 
words ! Sir, what is meant by this ? Is it intended that the people 
of the United States ought to be totally indifferent to the fortunes 
of these new neighbors ? Is no change, in the lights in which 
*ve are to view them, to be wrought by their having thrown off 
foreign dominion, established independence, and instituted, on our 
very borders, republican governments, essentially after our own 
example ? 

Sir, I do not wish to overrate — I do not overrate — the progress 
of these new states in the great work of establishing a well-secured 
popular liberty. I know that to be a great attainment, and I 
know they are but pupils in the school. But, thank God, they 
are in the school. They are called to meet difficulties, such as 
neither we nor our fathers encountered. For these we ought 
to make large allowances. What have we ever known like the 
colonial vassalage of these states ? When did we or our ancestors 
feel, like them, the weight of a political despotism that presses 
men to the earth, or of that religious intolerance which would 
shut up heaven to all but the bigoted ? Sir, we sprung from 
another stock. We belong to another race. We have known 
nothing — we have felt nothing — of the political despotism of 
Spain, nor of the heat of her fires of intolerance. No rational 
man expects that the south can run the same rapid career as 
the north ; or that an insurgent province of Spain is in the same 
condition as the English colonies when they first asserted their 
independence. There is, doubtless, much more to be done in the 
first than in the last case. But on that account the honor of the 
attempt is not less ; and if all difficulties shall be in time sur- 
mounted, it will be greater. The work may be more arduous ; 
it is not less noble, because there may be more of ignorance to 
enlighten — more of bigotry to subdue — more of prejudice to 
eradicate. If it be a weakness to feel a strong interest in the 
success of these great revolutions, I confess myself guilty of that 
weakness. If it be weak to feel that I am an American, to 
think that recent events have not only opened new modes of 
intercourse, but have created also new grounds of regard and sym- 
pathy between ourselves and our neighbors ; if it be weak to feel 
that the south, in her present state, is somewhat more emphat- 
ically a part of . America, than when she lay obscure, oppressed 
and unknown, under the grinding bondage of a foreign power ; if 



408 



MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH, &c. 



it be weak to rejoice, when, even in any corner of the earth, 
human beings are able to get up from beneath oppression, to erect 
themselves, and to enjoy the proper happiness of their intelligent 
nature ; — if this be weak, it is a weakness from which I claim no 
exemption. 

A day of solemn retribution now visits the once proud monarchy 
of Spain. The prediction is fulfilled. The spirit of Montezuma 
and of the Incas might now well say, 

" Art thou, too, fallen, Iberia ? Do we see 
The robber and the murderer weak as we ? 
Thou ! that has wasted earth, and dared despise 
Alike the wrath and mercy of the skies, — 
Thy pomp is in the grave ; thy glory laid 
Low in the pit thine avarice has made. " 

Mr. Chairman, I will detain you only with one more reflection 
on this subject. We cannot be so blind — we cannot so shut up 
our senses, and smother our faculties, as not to see, that in the 
progress and the establishment of South American liberty, our 
own example has been among the most stimulating causes. That 
great light — a light which can never be hid — the light of our own 
glorious revolution, has shone on the path of the South American 
patriots, from the beginning of their course. In their emergencies, 
they have looked to our experience ; in their political institutions, 
they have followed our models ; in their deliberations, they have 
invoked the presiding spirit of our own liberty. They have 
looked steadily, in every adversity, to the great northern light. 
In the hour of bloody conflict, they have remembered the fields 
which have been consecrated by the blood of our ow r n fathers ; 
and when they have fallen, they have wished only to be remem- 
bered with them, as men who had acted their parts bravely, for 
the cause of liberty in the western world. 

Sir, I have done. If it be weakness to feel the sympathy of 
one's nature excited for such men, in such a cause, I am guilty of 
that weakness. If it be prudence to meet their proffered civility, 
not with reciprocal kindness, but with coldness or with insult, I 
choose still to follow where natural impulse leads, and to give up 
that false and mistaken prudence, for the voluntary sentiment? of 
my heart. 



409 



AN ORATION, 

PRONOUNCED AT CAMBRIDGE, BEFORE 

THE SOCIETY OF PHI BETA KAPPA, 
august 26, 1624. 
BY EDWARD EVERETT. 



Mr. President, and Gentlemen, 

In discharging the honorable trust of being the public organ of 
your sentiments on this occasion, I have been anxious that the 
hour which we here pass together, should be occupied by those 
reflections exclusively which belong to us as scholars. Our asso- 
ciation in this fraternity is academical ; we engaged in it before 
our alma mater di c missed us from her venerable roof, to wander in 
the various paths of life ; and we have now come together in the 
academical holidays, from every variety of pursuit, from almost 
every part of our country, to meet on common ground, as the 
brethren of one literary household. The professional cares of 
life, like the conflicting tribes of Greece, have proclaimed to us a 
short armistice, that we may come up in peace to our Olympia. 

But from the wide field of literary speculation, and the innume- 
rable subjects of meditation which arise in it, a selection must be 
made. And it has seemed to me proper, that we should direct 
our thoughts, not merely to a subject of interest to scholars, but to 
one which may recommend itself as peculiarly appropriate to us. 
If ' that old man eloquent, whom the dishonest victory at Chero- 
nra killed with report,' could devote fifteen years to the compo- 
sition of his Panegyric on Athens, I shall need no excuse to a * 
society of American scholars, in choosing for the theme of an 
address, on an occasion like this, the peculiar motives to intellec- 
tual exertion in America. In this subject, that curiosity which 
every scholar feels in tracing and comparing the springs of mental 
activity, is heightened and dignified by the important connection 
of the inquiry with the condition and prospects of our native land. 

In the full comprehension of the terms, the motives to intellec- 
tual exertion in a country embrace the most important springs of 
national character. Pursued into its details, the study of these 
springs of national character is often little better than fanciful spec- 
35 F f f 



410 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



ulation. The questions, why Asia has almost always been the 
abode of despotism, and Europe more propitious to liberty ; why 
the Egyptians were abject and melancholy; the Greeks inventive, 
elegant, and versatile; the Romans stern, saturnine, and, in matters 
of literature, for the most part, servile imitators of a people whom 
they conquered, despised, and never equalled ; why tribes of bar- 
barians from the north and east, not known to differ essentially 
from eacn other at the time of their settlement in Europe, should 
have laid the foundation of national characters so dissimilar as those 
of the Spanish, French, German, and English nations ; — these are 
questions to which a few general answers may be attempted, that 
will probably be just and safe only in proportion as they are vague 
and comprehensive. Difficult as it is, even in the individual man. 
to point out precisely the causes, under the influence of which 
members of the same community and of the same family, placed 
apparently in the same circumstances, grow up with characters the 
most diverse ; it is infinitely more difficult to perform the same 
analysis on a subject so vast as a nation, where it is first not a 
small question what the character is, before you touch the inquiry 
into the circumstances by which it was formed. 

But as, in the case of individual character, there are certain 
causes of undisputed and powerful operation, there are, also, in 
national character, causes equally undisputed of improvement and 
excellence, on the one hand, and of degeneracy and decline, on 
the other. The philosophical student of history, the impartial 
observer of man, may often fix on circumstances, which, in their 
operation on the minds of the people, in furnishing the motives 
and giving the direction to intellectual exertion, have had the 
chief agency in making them what they were or are. Nor are 
there many exercises of the speculative principle more elevated 
than this. It is in the highest degree curious to trace physical 
facts into their political, intellectual and moral consequences ; and 
to show how the climate, the geographical position, and even the 
particular topography of a region, connect themselves by evident 
association with the state of society, its predominating pursuits, 
and characteristic institutions. 

In the case of other nations, particularly of those which in the 
great drama of the world have long since passed from the stage, 
these speculations are often only curious. The operation of a trop- 
ical climate in enervating and fitting a people for despotism ; the 
influence of a broad river or a lofty chain of mountains, in arresting 
the march of conquest or of emigration, and thus becoming the 
boundary, not merely of governments, but of languages, literature, 
institutions and character: the effect of a quarry of fine marble on 
the progress of the liberal arts : the agency of popular institutions 
In promoting popular eloquence, and the tremendous reaction of 
popular eloquence on the fortunes of a state ; the comparative 



AT CAMBRIDGE. 



411 



destiny of colonial settlements, of insular states, of tribes fortified 
in nature's Alpine battlements, or scattered over a smiling region 
of olive gardens and vineyards ; — these are all topics, indeed, of 
rational curiosity and liberal speculation, but imporiant only as 
they may illustrate the prospects of our own country. 

It is, therefore, when we turn the inquiry to our country, when 
we survey its features, search its history, and contemplate its 
institutions, to see what the motives are, which are to excite and 
guide the minds of the people ; when we dwell, not on a distant, 
an uncertain, an almost forgotten past, but on an impending future, 
teeming with life and action, toward which we are rapidly and 
daily swept forward, and with which we stand in the dearest con- 
nection which can bind the generations of man together; a future, 
which our own characters, our own actions, our own principles, 
will do something to stamp with glory or shame ; — it is then that 
the inquiry becomes practical, momentous, and worthy the atten- 
tion of every patriotic scholar. We then strive, as far as it is in 
the power of philosophical investigation to do it, to unfold our 
country's reverend auspices, to cast its great horoscope in the na- 
tional sky, where many stars are waning, and many have set ; to 
ascertain whether the soil which we love, as that where our fathers 
are laid, and we shall presently be laid with them, will be trod in 
times to come by a virtuous, enlightened and free people. 

The first of the circumstances which are acting, and will con- 
tinue to act, with a strong peculiarity among us, and which must 
prove one of the most powerful influences in exciting and direct- 
ing the intellect of the country, is the new form of political socie- 
ty, which has here been devised and established. I shall not wan- 
der so far from the literary limits of this occasion, nor into a field 
so oft trodden, as the praises of free political institutions. But the 
direct and appropriate influence on mental effort of institutions 
like ours, has not yet, perhaps, received the attention, which, from 
every American scholar, it richly deserves. I have ventured to 
say, that a new form of polity has here been devised and estab- 
lished. The ancient Grecian republics, indeed, were free enough 
within the walls of the single city, of which many of them were 
wholly or chiefly composed ; but to these single cities the freedom, 
as well as the power, was confined. Toward the confederated or 
tributary states, the government was generally a despotism, more 
capricious, and not less severe, than that of a single tyrant. Rome, 
as a state, was never free. In every period of her history, authen- 
tic and dubious, royal, republican, and imperial, her proud citizens 
were the slaves of an artful, accomplished, wealthy aristocracy ; 
and nothing but the hard-fought battles of her stern tribunes can 
•redeem her memory to the friends of liberty. In ancient and 
modern history, there is no example, before our own, of a purely 
elective and representative system. It is on an entirely novel plan, 



412 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



that, in this country, the whole direction and influence of affairs, 
— all the trusts and honors of society, — the power of making, ab- 
rogating and administering the laws, — the whole civil authority and 
sway, from the highest post in the government to the smallest vil 
lage trust, are put directly into the market of merit. Whatsoever 
efficacy there is in high station and exalted honors, to call out and 
exercise the powers, either by awakening the emulation of the as- 
pirants or exciting the efforts of the incumbents, is here directly 
exerted on the largest mass of men, with the smallest possible de- 
ductions. Nothing is bestowed on the chance of birth, nothing 
flows through the channel of hereditary family interests ; but 
whatever is desired must be sought in the way of a broad, fair, 
personal competition. It requires little argument to show, that 
such a system must most widely and most powerfully have the 
effect of appealing to whatever of energy the land contains ; of 
searching out, with magnetic instinct, in the remotest quarters, the 
latent ability of its children. 

It may be objected, and it has been, that, for want of an hered- 
itary government, we lose that powerful spring of action which 
resides in the patronage of such a government, and must emanate 
from the crown. With many individuals, friendly to our popular 
institutions, it is nevertheless an opinion, that we must consent to 
lose something of the genial influence of princely and royal patron- 
age on letters and arts, and find our consolation in the political 
benefits of our free system. It maybe doubted, however, whether 
this view be not entirely false. As no one can suppose, that tbe 
mere fact of the existence of an hereditary government adds any 
thing to the resources of the people, independent of other causes, 
whatever is gained by concentrating an active patronage in the 
metropolis and in the central administration, must be lost by with- 
drawing the means of patronage from the distant portions of the 
state and all its subordinate institutions. The effect produced on 
the civilization and intellectual growth of a country, by concen- 
trating the means and the control of patronage, at one political 
metropolis, may be compared to that, which would be produced 
on the civilization of Europe, by subverting its various inde- 
pendent governments, annihilating the numerous seats of improve- 
ment which are scattered over its surface, reducing to a dead level 
the mass of the population, and building upon the ruins of all the. 
local institutions one great metropolitan centre. — It is plain that, 
whatever might be gained in the splendor of the rewards and the 
intensity of the excitement, at the great fountain of honor, would 
be lost a hundred times over, by destroying all tne motives to ex- 
ertion and all the means of education, enjoyed by the mass of 
men. By this process, the public patronage is not merely with- 
drawn from the majority of those who might be influenced 
by it, but much of it is annihilated. On the contrary, by the 



AT CAMBRIDGE. 



413 



healthful action of our representative system, it is made to pervade 
the empire like the air ; to reach the farthest, descend to the 
lowest, and bind the distant together. It is made not only to 
cooperate with the successful and assist the prosperous, but to 
cheer the remote, « to remember the forgotten, to attend to the 
neglected, to visit the forsaken." Before the rising of our republic 
in the world, the faculties of men have had but one weary pil- 
grimage to perform — to travel up to court. By an improvement 
on the Jewish polity, which enjoined on the nation a visit thrice a 
year to the holy city, the great, the munificent, the enlightened 
states of the ancient and modern world have required a constant 
residence on the chosen spot. Provincial has become another 
term for inferior and rude ; and unpolite, which once meant only 
rural, has got to signify, in all our languages, something little 
better than barbarous. But since, in the nature of things, a small 
part only of the population of a large state can, by physical possi- 
bility, be crowded within the walls of a city, and there receive the 
genial beams of metropolitan favor, it follows that the great mass 
of men are cut off from the operation of some of the strongest 
excitements to exertion. It is rightfully urged then, as a great 
advantage of our system, that the excitements of society go down 
as low as its burdens, and search out and bring forward whatsoever 
of ability and zeal are comprehended within the limits of the land. 
This is but the beginning of the benefit, or rather it is not yet the 
benefit. It is the effect of this diffusion of privileges that is pre- 
cious. Capacity and opportunity, the twin-sisters, who can scarce 
subsist but with each other, are now brought together. The people 
who are to choose, and from whose number are to be chosen, by 
their neighbors, the highest offices of state, infallibly feel an im- 
pulse to mental activity ; they read, think, and compare ; they 
found village schools, they collect social libraries, they prepare 
their children for the higher establishments of education. The 
world, I think, has been abused on the tendency of institutions 
perfectly popular. From the ill-organized states of antiquity, 
teirific examples of license and popular misrule are quoted, to 
prove that man requires to be protected from himself, without 
asking who is to protect him from the protector, himself also a 
man ; while, from the very first settlement of America to the 
present day, the most prominent trait of our character has been to 
cherish and diffuse the means of education. The village school- 
house, and the village church, are the monuments which the 
American people have erected to their freedom ; to read, and 
write, and think, are the licentious practices which have character- 
ized our democracy. 

But it will be urged, perhaps, that, though the effect of our 
institutions be to excite the intellect of the nation, they excite it 
35* 



414 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



too much m a political direction ; that the division and subdivision 
of the country into states and districts, and the equal diffusion 
throughout them of political privileges and powers, whatever favor- 
able effect in other ways they may produce, are attended by this 
evil, — that they kindle a political ambition, where it would not 
and ought not be felt ; and particularly that they are unfriendly 
in their operation on literature, as they call the aspiring youth, 
from the patient and laborious vigils of the student, to plunge 
prematurely into the conflicts of the forum. It may, however, be 
doubted, whether there be any foundation whatever for a charge 
like this ; and whether the fact, so far as it is one, that the talent 
and ambition of the country incline, at present, to a political 
course, be not owing to causes wholly unconnected with the free 
character of our institutions. It need not be said that the admin- 
istration of the government of a country, whether it be liberal or 
despotic, is the first thing to be provided for. Some persons must 
be employed in making and administering the laws, before any 
other interest can receive attention. Our fathers, the pilgrims, 
before they left the vessel, in which for five months they had been 
tossed on the ocean, before setting foot on the new world of their 
desire, drew up a simple constitution of government. As this is 
the first care in the order of nature, it ever retains its paramount 
importance. Society must be preserved in its constituted forms, 
or there is no safety for life, no security for property, no perma- 
nence for any institution, civil, moral, or religious. The first 
efforts then of social men, are, of necessity, political. Apart from 
every call of ambition, honorable or selfish — of interest, enlarged 
or mercenary — the care of the government is the first care of a 
civilized community. In the early stages of social progress, where 
there is little property and a scanty population, the whole strength 
of the society must be employed in its support and defence. 
Though we are constantly receding from these stages, we have 
not wholly left them. Even our rapidly-increasing population is, 
and will for some time remain, small, compared with the space 
over which it is diffused ; and this, with the total absence of large 
hereditary fortunes, will create a demand for political services, on 
the one hand, and a necessity of rendering them, on the other. 
There is then no ground for ascribing the political tendency of the 
talent and activity of this country to an imagined incompatibility 
of popular institutions with the profound cultivation of letters. 
Suppose our government were changed to-morrow ; that the five 
points of a stronger government were introduced, an hereditary 
sovereign, an order of nobility, an established church, a standing 
army, and a vigilant police ; and that these should take place of 
that admirable system, which now, like the genial air, pervades 
all, supports all, cheers all, and is no where seen. Suppose this 



AT CAMBRIDGE. 



change made, and other circumstances to remain the same ; our 
population no more dense, our boundaries as wide, and the accu- 
mulation of private wealth no more abundant, — would there, in 
the new state of things, be less interest in politics ? By the terms 
of the supposition, the leading class of the community, the nobles, 
are to be politicians by birth. By the nature of the case, a large 
portion of the remainder, who gain their livelihood by their indus- 
try and talents, would be engrossed, not indeed in the free political 
competition which now prevails, but in pursuing the interests of 
rival court factions. On'e class only, the peasantry, would remain, 
which would take less interest in politics than the corresponding 
class in a free state ; or rather, this is a new class, which invaria- 
bly comes in with a strong government ; and no one can seriously 
think the cause of science and literature would be promoted, 
by substituting a European peasantry, in the place of, perhaps, 
the most substantial, uncorrupted population on earth, the Amer- 
ican yeomanry. Moreover, the evil in question is with us a self- 
correcting evil. If the career of politics be more open, and the 
temptation to crowd it stronger, competition will spring up, num- 
bers will engage in the pursuit ; the less able, the less industrious, 
the less ambitious, must retire, and leave the race to the swift and 
the battle to the strong. But in hereditary governments, no such 
remedy exists. One class of society, by the nature of its position, 
must be rulers, magistrates or politicians. Weak or strong, willing 
or unwilling, they must play the same, though they, as well as the 
people, pay the bitter forfeit. The obnoxious king can seldom 
shake off the empoisoned purple ; he must wear the crown of 
thorns, till it is struck off at the scaffold ; and the same artificial 
necessity has obliged generations of nobles, in all the old states of 
Europe, to toil and bleed for a 

"Power too great to keep or to resign." 

Where the compulsion stops short of these afflicting extremities, 
still, under the governments in question, a large portion of the 
community is unavoidably destined to the calling of the courtier, 
the soldier, the party retainer ; to a life of service, intrigue, and 
court attendance ; and thousands, and those the prominent individ- 
uals in society, are brought up to look on a livelihood gained by 
private industry as base ; on study as the pedant's trade, on labor 
as the badge of slavery. I look in vain, in institutions like these, 
for any thing essentially favorable to intellectual progress. On the 
contrary, while they must draw away the talent and ambition of 
the country, quite as much as popular institutions can do it, into 
pursuits foreign from the culture of the intellect, they necessarily 
doom to obscurity no small part of the mental energy of the land. 
For that mental energy has been equally diffused by sterner level 



416 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



lers than ever marched in the van of a revolution, — the nature of 
man and the providence of God. Native character, strength and 
quickness of mind, are not of the number of distinctions and ac- 
complishments that human institutions can monopolize within a 
city's walls. In quiet times, they remain and perish in the obscu- 
rity to which a false organization of society consigns them. In 
dangerous, convulsed and trying times, they spring up in the 
fields, in the village hamlets, and on the mountain tops, and teach 
the surprised favorites of human law, that bright eyes, skilful 
hands, quick perceptions, firm purpose, and brave hearts, are not 
the exclusive appanage of courts. Our popular institutions are 
favorable to intellectual improvement, because their foundation is , 
in dear nature. They do not consign the greater part of the 
social frame to torpidity and mortification. They send out a vital 
nerve to every member of the community, by which its talents 
and power, great or small, are brought into living conjunction and 
strong sympathy with the kindred intellect of the nation ; and 
every impression on every part vibrates with electric rapidity 
through the whole. They encourage nature to perfect her work ; 
they make education, the soul's nutriment, cheap ; they bring up 
remote and shrinking talent into the cheerful field of competition ; 
in a thousand ways they provide an audience for lips which nature 
has touched with persuasion ; they put a lyre into the hands of 
genius ; they bestow on all who deserve it or seek it, the only 
patronage worth having, the only patronage that ever struck out a 
spark of " celestial fire," — the patronage of fair opportunity. This 
is a day of improved education. New systems of teaching are 
devised; modes of instruction, choice of studies, adaptation of text- 
books, the whole machinery of means, have been brought in our 
day under severe revision. But were I to attempt to point out 
the most efficacious and comprehensive improvement in education, 
the engine by which the greatest portion of mind could be brought 
and kept under cultivation, the discipline which would reach far- 
thest, sink deepest, and cause the word of instruction, not to 
spread over the surface like an artificial hue, carefully laid on, 
but to penetrate to the heart and soul of its objects, it would be 
popular institutions. Give the people an object in promoting 
education, and the best methods will infallibly be suggested by 
that instinctive ingenuity of our nature, which provides means for 
great and precious ends. Give the people an object in promoting 
education, and the worn hand of labor will be opened to the last 
farthing, that its children may enjoy means denied to itself. This 
great contest about black boards and sand tables will then lose 
something of its importance, and even the exalted names of Bell 
and Lancaster may sink from that very lofty height, where an 
over-hasty admiration has placed them. 



AT CAMBRIDGE. 



417 



But though it be conceded to us, that the tendency which is 
alleged to exist in this country toward the political career, is not 
a vicious effect of our free institutions, still it may be inquired, 
whether the new form of social organization among us is at least 
to produce no corresponding modification of our literature. As 
the country advances, as the population becomes denser, as wealth 
accumulates, as the various occasions of a large, prosperous and 
polite community call into strong action and vigorous competition 
the literary talent of the country, will no peculiar form or direction 
be given to its literature by the nature of its institutions ? To 
this question an answer must, without hesitation, be given in the 
affirmative. Literature, as well in its origin as in its true and only 
genuine character, is but a more perfect communication of man with 
man, and mind with mind. It is a grave, sustained, deliberate utter- 
ance of fact, of opinion, and feeling ; or a free and happy reflection 
of nature, of characters, or of manners ; and if it be not these, it is 
poor imitation. It may, therefore, be assumed as certain, that the 
peculiarity of our condition and institutions will be reflected in 
some peculiarity of our literature ; but what that shall be, it is as 
yet too early to say. Literary history informs us of many studies, 
which have been neglected, as dangerous to existing governments ; 
and many others, which have been cultivated because they were 
prudent and safe. We have hardly the means of settling, from 
analogy, what direction the mind will most decisively take, when 
left under strong excitements to action, wholly without restraint 
from the arm of power. It is impossible to anticipate what gar- 
ments our native muses will weave for themselves. To foretell 
our literature would be to create it. There was a time before an 
epic poem, a tragedy, or an historical composition had ever been 
produced by the wit of man. It was a time of vast and power- 
ful empires, of populous and wealthy cities. But these new 
and beautiful forms of human thought and feeling all sprang up 
in Greece under the stimulus of her free institutions. Before 
they appeared in the world, it would have been idle for the phi- 
losopher to form conjectures as to the direction which the kindling 
genius of the age was to assume. He who could form, could and 
would realize the anticipation, and it would cease to be an antici- 
pation. Assuredly epic poetry was invented then, and not before, 
when the gorgeous vision of the Iliad, not in its full detail of cir- 
cumstance, but in the dim conception of its leading scenes and 
sterner features, burst into the soul of Homer. Impossible, indeed, 
were the task fully to foretell the progress of the mind, under the 
influence of institutions as new, as peculiar, and far more animat- 
ing than those of Greece. But if, as no one will deny, our political 
system bring more minds into action on equal terms ; if it provide 
a prompter circulation of thought throughout the community ; if it 

G GG 



418 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



give weight and emphasis to more voices; if it swell to tens of 
thousands and millions those " sons of emulation who crowd the 
narrow strait where honor travels," — then it seems not too much to 
expect some peculiarity, at least, if we may not call it improve- 
ment, in that literature which is but the voice and utterance of all 
this mental action. There is little doubt that the instrument of 
communication itself will receive great improvements ; that the 
written and spoken language will acquire force and power ; pos- 
sibly, that forms of address, wholly new, will be struck out, to 
meet the universal demand for new energy. When the improve- 
ment or the invention (whatever it be) comes, it will come un- 
looked for, as well to its happy author as the world. But where 
great interests are at stake, great concerns rapidly succeeding each 
other, depending on almost innumerable wills, and yet requiring to 
be apprehended in a glance, and explained in a word : where 
movements are to be given to a vast empire, not by transmitting 
orders, but by diffusing opinions, exciting feelings, and touching 
the electric chord of sympathy, — there language and expression will 
become intense, and the old processes of communication must put 
on a vigor and a directness adapted to the aspect of the times. 
Our country is called, as it is, practical ; but this is the element 
for intellectual action. No strongly-marked and high-toned litera- 
ture — poetry, eloquence, or ethics — ever appeared but in the 
pressure, the din, and crowd of great interests, great enterprises, 
perilous risks, and dazzling rewards. Statesmen, and warriors, 
and poets, and orators, and artists, start up under one and the 
same excitement. They are all branches of one stock. They 
form, and cheer, and stimulate, and, what is worth all the rest, 
understand each other ; and it is as truly the sentiment of the 
student, in the recesses of his cell, as of the soldier in the ranks, 
which breathes in the exclamation — 

" To all the sons of sense proclaim, 
One glorious hour of crowded life 
Is worth an age without a name." 

But we are brought back to the unfavorable aspect of the sub- 
ject, by being reminded out of history of the splendid patronage 
which arbitrary governments have bestowed on letters, and which, 
from the nature of the case, can hardly be extended even to the 
highest merit, under institutions like our own. We are told of the 
munificent pensions, the rich establishments, the large foundations ; 
of the museums erected, the libraries gathered, the endowments 
granted, by Ptolemies, Augustuses, and Louises of ancient and 
modern days. We are asked to remark the fruit of this noble 
patronage ; wonders of antiquarian or scientific lore, Thesauruses 
and Corpuses, efforts of erudition from which the emulous student, 



AT CAMBRIDGE. 



419 



who would read all things, weigh all things, surpass all things, 
recoils in horror ; volumes, and shelves of volumes, before which 
meek-eyed patience folds her hands in despair. 

When we have contemplated these things, and turn our thoughts 
back to our poor republican land, to our frugal treasury, and the 
caution with which it is dispensed ; to our modest fortunes, and the 
thrift with which they are hoarded ; to our scanty public libraries, 
and the plain brick walls within which they are deposited, — we may 
be apt to form gloomy auguries of the influence of free political in- 
stitutions on our literature. It is important, then, that we examine 
more carefully the experience of former ages, and see how far 
their institutions, as they have been more or less popular, have 
been more or less associated with displays of intellectual excel- 
lence. When we make this examination, w r e shall be gratified 
to find, that the precedents are all in favor of liberty. The great- 
est efforts of human genius have been made where the nearest 
approach to free institutions has taken place. There shone not 
forth one ray of intellectual light, to cheer the long and gloomy 
ages of the Memphian and Babylonian despots. Not an historian, 
not an orator, not a poet, is heard of in their annals. When you 
ask, what was achieved by the generations of thinking beings, the 
millions of men, whose natural genius was as bright as that of the 
Greeks, nay, who forestalled the Greeks in the first invention of 
many of the arts, — you are told that they built the pyramids of 
Memphis, the temples of Thebes, and the tower of Babylon, and 
carried Sesostris and Ninus, upon their shoulders, from the west 
of Africa to the Indus. Mark the contrast in Greece. With the 
first emerging of that country into the light of political liberty, the 
poems of Homer appear. Some centuries of political misrule and 
literary darkness follow, and then the great constellation of their 
geniuses seem to rise at once. The stormy eloquence and the 
deep philosophy, the impassioned drama and the grave history, 
were all produced for the entertainment of that "fierce democratic" 
of Athens. Here, then, the genial influence of liberty on letters, 
is strongly put to the test. Athens was certainly a free state; free 
to licentiousness, — free to madness. The rich were arbitrarily 
pillaged to defray the expenses of the state ; the great were ban- 
ished to appease the envy of their rivals ; the wise sacrificed to 
the fury of the populace. It was a state, in short, where liberty 
existed with most of the imperfections which have led men to 
love and praise despotism. Still, however, it was for this lawless, 
merciless people, that the most chastised and accomplished litera- 
ture which the world has known was produced. The philosophy 
of Plato was the attraction which drew to a morning's walk in the 
olive gardens of the academy, the young men of this factious city. 
Those tumultuous assemblies of Athens — the very same, which 



420 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



rose in their wrath, and to a man, and clamored for the blood of 
Phocion — required to be addressed, not in the cheap, extempo- 
raneous rant of modern demagogues, but in the elaborate and 
thrice-repeated orations of Demosthenes. No ! the noble and 
elegant arts of Greece grew up in no Augustan age, — enjoyed 
neither royal nor imperial patronage. Unknown before in the 
world, strangers on the Nile, and strangers on the Euphrates, they 
sprang at once into life in a region not unlike our own New Eng- 
land — iron-bound, sterile and free. The imperial astronomers of 
Chaldaea went up almost to the stars in their observatories ; but it 
was a Greek who first foretold an eclipse, and measured the year. 
The nations of the East invented the alphabet : but not a line has 
reached us of profane literature, in any of their languages, — and 
it is owing to the embalming power of Grecian genius, that the 
invention itself has been transmitted to the world. The Egyptian 
architects could erect structures, which, after three thousand five 
hundred years, are still standing in their uncouth original majesty ; 
but it was only on the barren soil of Attica, that the beautiful 
columns of the Parthenon and the Theseum could rest, which are 
standing also. With the decline of liberty in Greece, began the 
decline of all her letters and all her arts, though her tumultuous 
democracies were succeeded by liberal and accomplished princes. 
Compare the literature of the Alexandrian with that of the Per- 
iclean age ; how cold, pedantic and imitative ! Compare, — I will 
not say, the axes, the eggs, the altars, and the other frigid devices 
of the pensioned wits in the museum at Alexandria, — but compare 
their best spirits with those of independent Greece ; Callimachus 
with Pindar, Licophron with Sophocles, Aristophanes of Byzan- 
tium with Aristotle, and Apollonius the Rhodian with Homer. 
When we descend to Rome, to the Augustan age, the exalted 
era of Maecenas, we find one uniform work of imitation, often of 
translation. The choicest geniuses seldom rise beyond a happy 
transfusion of the Grecian masters. Horace translates Alcaeus, 
Terence translates Menander, Lucretius translates Epicurus, Virgil 
translates Homer and Cicero — I had almost said, translates De- 
mosthenes and Plato. But the soul of liberty did burst forth from 
the lips of Cicero ; " her form had not yet lost all its original 
brightness ; " her inspiration produced in him the only specimens 
of a purelv original literature, which Rome has transmitted to us. 
After him, their literary history is written in one line of Tacitus, — 
gliscente adulatione, magna ingenia deterrebantur. The fine arts 
revived a little under the princes of the Flavian house, but never 
rose higher than a successful imitation of the waning excellence of 
Greece. With the princes of this line, the arts of Rome expired; 
and Constantine the Great was obliged to tear down an arch of 
Trajan for sculptures, wherewithal to adorn his own. In modern 



AT CAMBRIDGE. 



421 



times, civilized states have multiplied ; political institutions have 
varied in different states, and at different times in the same state : 
some liberal institutions have existed in the bosom of societies 
otherwise despotic ; and a great addition of new studies has been 
made to the encyclopedia, which have all been cultivated by 
great minds, and some of which, as the physical and experimental 
sciences, have little or no direct connection with the state of liber- 
ty. These circumstances perplex, in some degree, the inquiry 
into the effect of free institutions on intellectual improvement in 
modern times. There are times and places, where it would seem 
that the muses, both the gay and the severe, had been transformed 
into court ladies. Upon the whole, however, the modern history 
of literature bears but a cold testimony to the genial influence 
of the governments under which it has grown up. Dante and 
Petrarch composed their beautiful works in exile : Boccaccio 
complains, in the most celebrated of his, that he was transfixed 
with the darts of envy and calumny ; Machiavelli was pursued 
by the party of the Medici for resisting their tyrannical designs; 
Guicciardini retired in disgust, to compose his history in voluntary 
exile ; Galileo confessed, in the prisons of the inquisition, that the 
earth did not move ; Ariosto lived in poverty ; and Tasso died in 
want and despair.* Cervantes, after he had immortalized himself 
in his great work, was obliged to write on for bread. The whole 
French academy was pensioned to crush the great Corneille. 
Racine, after living to see his finest pieces derided as cold and 
worthless, died of a broken heart. The divine genius of Shak- 
speare raised him to no higher rank than that of a subaltern actor 
in his own, and Ben Jonson's, plays. The immortal Chancellor 
was sacrificed to the preservation of a worthless minion, and is said 
(falsely, I trust) to have begged a cup of beer in his old age, and 
begged it in vain. The most valuable of the pieces of Selden 
were written in that famous resort of great minds, the tower of 
London. Milton, surprised by want in his infirm old age, sold the 
first production of the human mind for five pounds. The great 
boast of English philosophy was expelled from his place in Ox- 
ford, and kept in banishment, "the king having been given to 
understand," to use the words of lord Sunderland, who ordered the 
expulsion, "that one Locke has, upon several occasions, behaved 
himself very factiously against the government." Dryden sac- 
rificed his genius to the spur of immediate want. Otway was 
choked with a morsel of bread, too ravenously swallowed after a 
long fast. Johnson was taken to prison for a debt of five shillings, 
and Burke petitioned for a professorship at Glasgow, and was 
denied. When we survey these facts, and the innumerable others 

* Martinelli, in his edition of the Decamerone, cited in the introduction to 
Sidney's Discourses on Government, edition of 1751, p. 34. 

36 



422 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



of which these are not even an adequate specimen, we may, per- 
haps, conclude that, in whatever way the arbitrary governments of 
Europe have encouraged letters, it has not been in that of a steady 
cheering patronage ; we may think there is abundant reason to 
acknowledge, that the ancient lesson is confirmed bv modern 
experience, and that popular institutions are most propitious to 
the full and prosperous growth of intellectual excellence. 

If the perfectly organized system of liberty, which here prevails, 
be thus favorable to intellectual progress, various other conditions 
of our national existence are not less so — particularly the extension 
of one language, government and character, over so vast a space as 
the United States of America. Hitherto, in the main, the world 
has seen but two forms of social existence — free governments in 
small states, and arbitrary governments in large ones. Though 
various shades of both have appeared at different times in the 
world, yet, on the whole, the political ingenuity of man has never 
found out the mode of extending liberal institutions beyond small 
districts, or of governing large empires by any other means than 
the visible demonstration and exercise of absolute power. The 
effect, in either case, has been unpropitious to the growth of 
intellectual excellence. Free institutions, though favorable to the 
growth of intellectual excellence, are not the only thing needed. 
The wandering savage is free ; but most of the powers of his mind 
lie dormant, under the severe privations of a barbarous life. An 
infant colony, on a distant coast, may be free ; but for want of the 
necessary mental aliment and excitement, may be unable to rise 
above the limits of material existence. In order, then, that free 
institutions may have their full and entire effect, in producing 
the highest attainable degree of intellectual improvement, they 
require to be established in an extensive region, and over a nume- 
rous people. This constitutes a state of society entirely new 
among men, — a vast empire whose institutions are wholly popu- 
lar. While we experience the genial influence of those principles, 
which belong to all free states, and in proportion as they are free, 
— independence of thought, and the right of expressing it, — we 
are to feel in this country, we and those who succeed us, all that 
excitement, which, in various ways, arises from the reciprocal ac- 
tion upon each other of the parts of a great empire. Literature, 
as has been partly hinted, is the voice of the age and the state. 
The character, energy and resources of the country, are reflected 
and imaged forth in the conceptions of its great minds. They are 
the organs of the time. They speak not their own language, they 
scarce think their own thoughts ; but, under an impulse like the 
prophetic enthusiasm of old, they must feel and utter the senti- 
ments which society inspires. They do not create, they obey the 
spirit of the age, — the serene and beautiful spirit, descended from 



AT CAMBRIDGE 



423 



the highest heaven of liberty, who laughs at our little preconcep- 
tions, and, with the breath of his mouth, sweeps before him the 
men and the nations that cross his path. By an unconscious 
instinct, the mind, in the strong action of its powers, adapts itself 
to the number and complexion of the other minds with which it 
is to enter into communion or conflict. As the voice falls into 
the key, which is suited to the space to be filled, the mind, in the 
various exercises of its creative faculties, strives with curious search 
for that master-note, which will awaken a vibration from the sur- 
rounding community, and which, if it do not find, it is itself too 
often struck dumb. 

For this reason, from the moment in the destiny of nations that 
they descend from their culminating point and begin to decline, 
from that moment the voice of creative genius is hushed, and, at 
best, the age of criticism, learning and imitation succeeds. When 
Greece ceased to be independent, the forum and the stage became 
mute. The patronage of Macedonian, Alexandrian and Perga- 
mean princes was lavished in vain. They could not woo the 
healthy muses of Hellas, from the cold moun<ain-tops ol Greece, 
to dwell in their gilded halls. Nay, though the fall of greatness, 
the decay of beauty, the waste of strength, and the wreck of 
power, have ever been among the favorite themes of the pensive 
muse, yet not a poet arose in Greece to chant her own elegy; and 
it is after near three centuries, and from Cicero and Sulpicius, that 
we catch the first notes of pious and pathetic lamentation over the 
fallen land of the arts. The freedom and genius of a country are 
invariably gathered into a common tomb, and there 

" Can only strangers breathe 
The name of that which was beneath." 

It is when we reflect on this power of an auspicious future, that 
we realize the prospect which smiles upon the intellect of Amer- 
ica. It may justly be accounted the great peculiarity of ancient 
days, compared with, modern, that in antiquity there was, upon the 
whole, but one civilized and literary nation at a time in the world. 
Art and refinement followed in the train of political ascendency, 
from the East to Greece, and from Greece to Rome. In the 
modern world, under the influence of various causes, intellectual, 
political and moral, civilization has been diffused throughout the 
greater part of Europe and America. Now mark a singular fatal- 
ity as regards the connection of this enlarged and diffused civiliza- 
tion, with the progress of letters, and the excitement to intellectual 
exertion in any given state. Instead of one sole country, as in 
antiquity, where the arts and refinements find a home, tliere are, 
in modern Europe, seven or eight equally entitled to the general 
name of cultivated nations, and in each of whicn some minds ^f 



424 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



the first order have appeared. And yet, by the unfortunate mul- 
tiplication of languages, an obstacle all but insuperable has been 
thrown in the way of the free progress of genius, in its triumphant 
course, from region to region. The muses of Shakspeare and 
Milton, of Camoens, of Lope de Vega, and Calderon, of Corneille 
and Racine, of Dante and Tasso, of Goethe and Schiller, are 
strangers to each other. 

This evil was so keenly felt in the sixteenth and seventeenth 
centuries, that the Latin language was widely adopted as a dialect 
common to scholars. We see men like Luther, Calvin and Eras- 
mus, Bacon, Grotius and Thuanus, who could scarce have written 
a line without exciting the admiration of their contemporaries, 
driven to the use of a tongue which none but the learned could 
understand. For the sake of addressing the scholars of other 
countries, these great men, and others like them, in many of their 
writings, were obliged to cut themselves off from all sympathy with 
the mass of those, whom, as patriots, they must have wished most 
to instruct. In works of pure science and learned criticism, this is 
of less consequence : for, being independent of sentiment, it matters 
less how remote from real life the symbols in which their ideas are 
conveyed. But when we see a writer like Milton, who, more 
than any other whom England ever produced, was a master of 
the music of his native tongue, — who, besides all the eloquence 
of thought and imagery, knew better than any other man how 
to clothe them, according to his own beautiful expression, 

In notes, with many a winding bout 
Of linked sweetness, long drawn out, 
With wanton heed and giddy cunning, 
The melting voice through mazes running, 
Untwisting all the chains that tie 
The hidden soul of harmony ; " 

when we see a master of English eloquence, thus gifted, choosing 
a dead language, the dialect of the closet, a tongue without an 
echo from the hearts of the people, as the vehicle of his defence 
of that people's rights, — asserting the cause of Englishmen in the 
language, as it may be truly called, of Cicero, — we can only 
measure the incongruity, by reflecting what Cicero would himself 
have thought and felt, if called to defend the cause of Roman 
freedom, not in the language of the Roman citizen, but in that of 
the Chaldeans or Assyrians, or some people still farther remote in 
the history of the world. There is little doubt that the prevalence 
of the Latin language among modern scholars was a great cause 
not only of the slow progress of letters among the lower ranks, but 
of the stiffness and constraint formerly visible in the vernacular 
<ty\e of most scholars themselves. That the reformation in religion 
advanced with such rapidity, is, doubtless, in no small degree, 



AT CAMBRIDGE. 



425 



to be attributed to the translation of the Scriptures, and the use of 
liturgies in the modern tongues. While the preservation m Eng- 
land of a strange language (I will not sin against the majesty of 
Rome by calling it Latin) in legal acts, down to so late a period 
as 1730, may be one cause, that the practical forms of adminis- 
tering justice have not been made to keep pace with the popular 
views, that have triumphed in other things. With the erection 
of popular institutions under Cromwell, among various other legal 
improvements,* very many of which were speedily adopted by 
our plain-dealing forefathers, the records of the law were ordered 
to be kept in English ; "A novelty," says the learned commen- 
tator on the English laws, "which at the restoration was no long- 
er continued, practisers having found it very difficult to express 
themselves so concisely or significantly in any other language but 
Latin ;"f an argument for the use of that language, whose sound- 
ness it must be left to clients to estimate. 

Nor are the other remedies more efficacious, which have been 
attempted for the evil of a multiplicity of tongues. Something is 
done by translations, and something by the acquisition of foreign 
languages. But that no effectual transfusion of the higher litera- 
ture of a country can take place, in the way of translation, is 
matter of notoriety ; and it is a remark of one of the few who could 
have courage to make such a remark, Madame de Stael, that it is 
impossible fully to comprehend the literature of a foreign tongue. 
The general preference given to Young's Night Thoughts and 
Ossian, over all the other English poets, in many parts of the con- 
tinent of Europe, seems to confirm the justice of the observation. 
There is, indeed, an influence of exalted genius coextensive with 
the earth. Something of its power will be felt, in spite of the 
obstacles of different languages, remote regions, and other times. 
But its true empire, its lawful sway, are at home and over the 
hearts of kindred men. A charm, which nothing can borrow, 
nothing counterfeit, nothing dispense with, resides in the simple 
sound of our mother tongue. Not analyzed, nor reasoned upon, it 
unites the earliest associations of life with the maturest conceptions 
of the understanding. The heart is willing to open all its avenues 
to the language in which its infantile caprices were soothed ; and 
by the curious efficacy of the principle of association, it is this echo 
from the feeble dawn of life, which gives to eloquence much of its 
manly power, and to poetry much of its divine charm. This 
feeling of the music of our native language is the first intellectual 
capacity that is developed in children ; and when by age or mis- 
fortune, 

" The ear is all unstrung, 
Still, still, it loves the lowland tongue." 

* See a numher of them in Lord Somers' Tracts, vol. i. 
t Blackstone's Commentaries, vol. iii. 422. 

36* 



t26 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



What a noble prospect is opened in this connection for the circu- 
lation of thought and sentiment in our country! Instead of thai 
multiplicity of dialect, by which mental communication and sym- 
pathy are cut off in the old world, a continually-expanding realn 
is opened and opening to American intellect, in the community o. 
our language, throughout the wide-spread settlements of this con 
tinent. The enginery of the press will here, for the first time, be 
brought to bear, with all its mighty power, on the minds and hearts 
of men, in exchanging intelligence, and circulating opinions, un- 
checked by the diversity of language, over an empire more exten- 
sive than the whole of Europe. 

And this community of language, all important as it is, is but a 
part of the manifold brotherhood, which unites and will unite the 
growing millions of America. In Europe, the work of interna- 
tional alienation, which begins in diversity of language, is earned 
on and consummated by diversity of government, institutions, 
national descent, and national prejudices. In crossing the principal 
rivers, channels and mountains, in that quarter of the world, you 
are met, not only by new tongues, but by new forms of government, 
new associations of ancestry, new and generally hostile objects of 
national boast and gratulation. While, on the other hand, through- 
out the vast regions included within the limits of our republic, not 
only the same language, but the same laws, the same national 
government, the same republican institutions, and a common ances- 
tral association prevail, and will diffuse themselves. Mankind will 
here exist, move, and act in a kindred mass, such as was' never 
before congregated on the earth's surface. The necessary conse- 
quences of such a cause overpower the imagination. What would 
be the effect on the intellectual state of Europe, at the present 
day, were all her nations and tribes amalgamated into one vast 
empire, speaking the same tongue, united into one political system, 
and that a free one, and opening one broad, unobstructed pathway 
for the interchange of thought and feeling, from Lisbon to Arch- 
angel ! If effects are to bear a constant proportion to their causes ; 
if the energy of thought is to be commensurate with the masses 
which prompt it, and the masses it must penetrate; if eloquence 
is to grow in fervor with the weight of the interests it is to plead, 
and the grandeur of the assemblies it addresses ; if efforts rise 
with the glory that is to crown them ; in a word, if the faculties of 
the human mind, as we firmly believe, are capable of tension and 
achievement altogether indefinite ; 

" Nil actum reputans, dum quid superesset agendum," — 

then it is not too much to say, that a new era will open on the 
intellectual world, in the fulfilment of our country's prospects. 
By the sovereign efficacy of the partition of powers between the 
national and state governments, in virtue of which the national 



AT CAMBRIDGE. 



427 



government is relieved from all the odium of internal administration, 
and the state governments are spared the conflicts of foreign poli- 
tics, all bounds seem removed from the possible extension of our 
country, but the geographical limits of the continent. Instead of 
growing cumbrous, as it increases in size, there never was a mo- 
ment since the first settlement of Virginia, when the political sys- 
tem of America moved with so firm and bold a step as at the present 
day. If there is any faith in our country's auspices, this great con- 
tinent, in no remote futurity, will be filled up with a homogeneous 
population ; with the mightiest kindred people known in history ; 
our language will acquire an extension which no other ever pos- 
sessed ; and the empire of the mind, with nothing to resist its sway, 
will attain an expansion, of which as yet we can but partly conceive. 
The vision is too magnificent to be fully borne ; a mass of two or three 
hundred millions, not chained to the oar, like the same number in 
China, by a brutalizing despotism, but held in their several orbits of 
nation and state, by the grand representative attraction ; bringing to 
bear on every point the concentrated energy of such a host ; calling 
into competition so many minds ; uniting into one great national feel- 
ing the hearts of so many freemen ; all to be guided, persuaded, 
moved and swayed, by the master-spirits of the time. 

Let me not be told, that this is a chimerical imagination of a 
future indefinitely removed ; let me not hear repeated the ribaldry 
of an anticipation of "two thousand years " — of a vision that re- 
quires for its fulfilment a length of ages beyond the grasp of any 
reasonable computation. It is the last point of peculiarity in our 
condition, to which I invite your attention, as affecting the prog- 
ress of intellect in the country, that it is growing with a rapidity 
hitherto entirely without example in the world. For the two hun- 
dred years of our existence, the population has doubled itself, in 
periods of less than a quarter of a century. In the infancy of the 
country, and while our numbers remained within the limits of a 
youthful colony, a progress so rapid as this, however important 
in the principle of growth disclosed, was not yet a circumstance 
strongly to fix the attention. But, arrived at a population of ten 
millions, it is a fact of the most overpowering interest, that, within 
less than twenty-five years, these ten millions will have swelled to 
twenty; that the younger members of this audience will be citizens 
of the largest civilized state on earth ; that in a few years more 
than one century, the American population will equal the fabulous 
numbers of the Chinese empire. This rate of increase has already 
produced the most striking phenomena. A few weeks after the 
opening of the revolutionary drama at Lexington, the momentous 
intelligence, that the first blood was spilt, reached a party of hunt 
ers beyond the Alleghanies, who had wandered far into the west 
era wilderness. In prophetic commemoration of the glorious 



428 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



event, they gave the name of Lexington to the spot of their en- 
campment in the woods. That spot is now the capital of a state 
larger than Massachusetts ; it is the seat of a university as fully 
attended as our venerable Alma Mater ; nay, more, it is the capi- 
tal of a state from which, in the language of one of her own citi- 
zens, whose eloquence is the ornament of his country, the tide of 
emigration still farther westward is more fully pouring than from 
any other in the Union.* 

I need not say that this astonishing increase of numbers is by 
no means the limit and measure of our country's growth. Arts, 
agriculture, all the great national interests, all the sources of na- 
tional wealth, are growing in a ratio still more rapid. In cur 
cities the intensest activity is apparent ; in the country every 
spring of prosperity, from the smallest improvement in husbandry 
to the construction of canals across the continent, is in vigorous 
action ; abroad, our vessels are beating the pathways of the ocean 
white ; on the inland frontier, the nation is journeying on, like a 
healthy giant, with a pace more like romance than reality. 

These facts, and thousands like them, form one of those pecu- 
liarities in our country's condition, which will have the most pow- 
erful influence on the minds of its children. The population of 
several states of Europe has reached its term. In some it 
is declining, in some stationary, and in the most prosperous, under 
the extraordinary stimulus of the last part of the eighteenth cen- 
tury, it doubles itself but about once in seventy-five years. In 
consequence of this, the process of social transmission is heavy 
and slow. Men, not adventitiously favored, come late into life, 
and the best years of existence are exhausted in languishing com- 
petition. The man grows up, and, in the stern language of one of 
their most renowned economists,! finds no cover laid for him at 
Nature's table. The smallest official provision is a boon, at 
which great minds are not ashamed to grasp ; the assurance of 
the most frugal subsistence commands the brightest talents and the 
most laborious studies; poor wages pay for the unremitted labor 
of the most curious hands ; and it is the smallest part of the pop- 
ulation only that is within the reach even of these humiliating 
springs of action. We need not labor to contrast this state of 
things with the teeming growth and noble expansion of all our 
institutions and resources. Instead of being shut up, as it were, in 
the prison of a stationary, or a very slowly progressive commu- 
nity, the emulation of our countrymen is drawn out and tempt- 
ed on, by a horizon constantly receding before them. New 
nations of kindred freemen are springing up in successive periods, 
shorter even than the active portion of the life of man. " While 



* Mr. Clay's late speech on Internal Improvement. 



t Mr. Malthus. 



AT CAMBRIDGE. 



429 



we spend our time," says Burke on this topic, " in deliberating on 

the mode of opvernino- two millions in America, we shall find we 

... 

have millions more to manage."* Many individuals are in this 
house, who were arrived at years of discretion when these words 
of Burke were uttered, and the two millions, which Great Britain 
was then to manage, have grown into ten, exceedingly unmanage- 
able. The most affecting view of this subject is, that it puts it 
in the power of the wise, and good, and great to gather, while 
they live, the ripest fruits of their labors. Where, in human his- 
tory, is to be found a contrast like that, which the last fifty years 
have crowded into the lives of those favored men, who, raising 
their hands or their voices, when our little bands were led out to the 
perilous conflict with one of the most powerful empires on earth, 
have lived to be crowned with the highest honors of the republic 
which they established? Honor to their gray hairs, and peace 
and serenity to the evening of their eventful days ! 

Though it may never again be the fortune of our country to 
bring within the compass of half a century a contrast so dazzling 
m this, yet in its grand and steady progress, the career of duty and 
usefulness will be run by all its children, under a constantly-increas- 
ing stimulus. The voice, which, in the morning of life, shall awa- 
ken the patriotic sympathy of the land, will be echoed back by a 
community, incalculably swelled in all its proportions, before it shall 
be hushed in death. The writer, by whom the noble features of 
our scenery shall be sketched with a glowing pencil, the traits of 
our romantic early history gathered up with filial zeal, and the pe- 
culiarities of our character seized with delicate perception, cannot 
mount so entirely and rapidly to success, but that ten years will 
add new millions to the numbers of his readers. The American 
statesman, the orator, whose voice is already heard in its suprema- 
cy, from Florida to Maine, whose intellectual empire already ex- 
tends beyond the limits of Alexander's, has yet new states and 
new nations starting into being, the willing tributaries to his sway. 

This march of our population westward has been attended with 
consequences in some degree novel, in the history of the human 
mind. It is a fact, somewhat difficult of explanation, that the re- 
finement of the ancient nations seemed almost wholly devoid of 
an elastic and expansive principle. The arts of Greece were en- 
chained to her islands and her coasts ; they did not penetrate the 
interior. The language and literature of Athens were as unknown, 
to the north of Pindus, at a distance of two hundred miles from 
the capital of Grecian refinement, as they were in Scythia. 
Thrace, whose mountain tops may almost be seen from the porch 
of the temple of Minerva at Sunium, was the proverbial abode 

* Speech on Conciliation with America, March 22, 1775. 



430 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



of barbarism. Though the colonies of Greece were scattered on 
the coasts of Italy, of France, of Spain, and of Africa, no exten- 
sion of their population toward the interior took place, and the arts 
did nut penetrate beyond the walls of the cities, where they were 
cultivated. How different is the picture of the diffusion of the 
arts and improvement of civilization, from the coast to the interior 
of America! Population advances westward with a rapidity 
which numbers may describe indeed, but cannot represent, with 
any vivacity, to the mind. The wilderness, which one year is 
impassable, is traversed the next by the caravans of the industrious 
emigrants, who go to follow the setting sun, with the language, the 
institutions, and the arts of civilized life. It is not the irruption 
of wild barbarians, come to visit the wrath of God on a degener- 
ate empire ; it is not the inroad of disciplined banditti, marshalled 
by the intrigues of ministers and kings. It is the human family 
led out to possess its broad patrimony. The states and nations, 
which are springing up in the valley of the Missouri, are bound to 
us by the dearest ties of a common language, a common govern- 
ment, and a common descent. Before New England can look 
with coldness on their rising myriads, she must forget that some of 
the best of her own blood is beating in their veins ; that her hardy 
children, with their axes on their shoulders, have been literally 
among the pioneers in this march of humanity ; that young as she 
is, she has become the mother of populous states. What gener- 
ous mind would sacrifice to a selfish preservation of local prepon- 
derance, the delight of beholding civilized nations rising up in the 
desert ; and the language, the manners, the institutions, to which 
he has been reared, carried with his household gods to the foot of 
the Rocky Mountains ? Who can forget that this extension of our 
territorial limits is the extension of the empire of all we hold dear ; 
of our laws, of our character, of the memory of our ancestors, of 
the great achievements in our history ? Whithersoever the sons 
of the thirteen states shall wander, to southern or western climes, 
they will send back their hearts to the rocky shores, the battle 
fields, and the intrepid councils of the Atlantic coast. These are 
placed beyond the reach of vicissitude. They have become, al 
ready, matter of history, of poetry, of eloquence: 

" The love, where death has set his seal, 
Nor age can chill, nor rival steal, 
Nor falsehood disavow." 

Divisions may spring up, ill blood arise, parties be formed, and 
interests may seem to clash ; but the great bonds of the nation are 
linked to what is past. The deeds of the great men, to whom 
this country owes its origin and growth, are a patrimony, I know, 



AT CAMBRIDGE. 



431 



of which its children will never deprive themselves. As iong as 
the Mississippi and the Missouri shall flow, those men and those 
deeds will be remembered on their banks. The sceptre of gov 
ernment may go where it will; but that of patriotic feeling can 
never depart from Judah. In all that mighty region, which is 
drained by the Missouri and its tributary streams (the valley co- 
extensive with the temperate zone), will there be, as long as the 
name of America shall last, a father, that will not take his children 
on his knee, and recount to them the events of the twentieth of 
December, the nineteenth of April, the seventeenth of June, and 
the fourth of July ? 

This, then, is the theatre on which the intellect of America is 
to appear, and such the motives to its exertion ; such the mass to 
be influenced by its energies, such the crowd to witness its efforts, 
such the glory to crown its success. If I err, in this happy vision 
of my country's fortunes, I thank God for an error so animating. 
If this be false, may I never know the truth. Never may you, 
my friends, be under any other feeling, than that a great, a grow- 
ing, an immeasurably expanding country, is calling upon you for 
your best services. The name and character of your Alma Mater 
have already been carried, by some of our brethren, thousands of 
miles from her venerable walls; and thousands of miles still farther 
westward, the communities of kindred men are fast gathering, whose 
minds and hearts will act in sympathy with yours. 

The most powerful motives call on us, as scholars, for those 
efforts, which our common country demands of all her children. 
Most of us are of that class, who owe whatever of knowledge has 
shone into our minds, to the free and popular institutions of our 
native land. There are few of us who may not be permitted to 
boast, that we have been reared in an honest poverty or a frugal 
competence, and owe every thing to those means of education 
which are equally open to all. We are summoned to new energy 
and zeal by the high nature of the experiment we are appointed 
in Providence to make, and the grandeur of the theatre on which 
it is to be performed. When the old world afforded no longer any 
hope, it pleased Heaven to open this last refuge of humanity. The 
attempt has begun, and is going on, far from foreign corruption, on 
the broadest scale, and under the most benignant auspices ; and it 
certainly rests with us to solve the great problem in human society 
— to settle, and that forever, the momentous question — whether 
mankind can be trusted with a purely popular system ? One 
might almost think, without extravagance, that the departed wise 
and good, of all places and times, are looking down from their 
happy seats to witness what shall now be done by us ; that they 
who lavished their treasures and their blood of old, who labored 
and suffered, who spake and wrote, who fought and perished, in 



432 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



the one great cause of freedom and truth, are now hanging, from 
their orbs on high, over the last solemn experiment of humanity. 
As T have wandered over the spots, once the scene of their labors, 
and mused among the prostrate columns of their senate-houses and 
forums, I have seemed almost to hear a voice from the tombs of 
departed ages ; from the sepulchres of the nations which died 
before the sight. They exhort us, they adjure us, to be faithful 
to our trust. They implore us, by the long trials of struggling 
humanity — by the blessed memory of the departed — by the dear 
faith which has been plighted, by pure hands, to the holy cause of 
truth and man — by the awful secrets of the prison-houses, where 
the sons of freedom have been immured — by the noble heads 
which have been brought to the block — by the wrecks of time, 
by the eloquent ruins of nations, they conjure us not to quench 
the light which is rising on the world. Greece cries to us, by the 
convulsed lips of her poisoned, dying Demosthenes ; and Rome 
pleads with us in the mute persuasion of her mangled Tully. 
They address us, each and all, in the glorious language of Milton, 
to one who might have canonized his memory in the hearts of the 
friends of liberty, but who did most shamefully betray the cause : 
" Reverere tantam de te expectationem, spem patriae de te unicam. 
Reverere vultus et vulnera tot fortium virorum, quotquot pro Yt- 
bertate tam strenue decertarunt, manes etiam eorum qui in ipso 
certamine occubuerunt. Reverere exterarum quoque civitatum 
existimationem de te atque sermones ; — quantas res de liber- 
tate nostra tam fortiter parta, de nostra republica tam gloriose 
exorta sibi polliceantur ; quae si tam cito quasi aborta evanuerit, 
orofecto nihil aeque dedecorosum huic genti atque periculosum 
merit."* 

Yes, my friends, such is the exhortation which calls on us to 
exert our powers, to employ our time, and consecrate our labors, 
in the cause of our native land. When we engage in that solemn 
study, the history of our race, — when we survey the progress of 
man, from his cradle in the east to these last limits of his wander- 
ing, — when we behold him forever flying westward from civil and 
religious thraldom, bearing his household gods over mountains and 
seas, seeking rest and finding none, but still pursuing the flying 
bow of promise to the glittering hills which it spans in Hesperian 
climes, we cannot but exclaim with Bishop Berkeley, the generous 
prelate of England, who bestowed his benefactions, as well as 
blessings, on our country, 

" Westward the star of empire takes its way ; 
The four first acts already past. 
The fifth shall close the drama with the day ; 
Time's noblest offspring is the last. " 

* Milton's Defensio Secunda. 



AT CAMBRIDGE. 



433 



In that high romance, if romance it be, in which the great minds 
of antiquity sketched the fortunes of the ages to come, they pictured 
to themselves a favored region beyond the ocean, a land of equal 
laws and happy men. The primitive poets beheld it in the islands 
of the blest ; the Doric bards fancied it in the hyperborean 
regions ; the sage of the academy placed it in the lost Atlantis ; 
and even the sterner spirit of Seneca could discern a fairer abode 
of humanity, in distant regions then unknown. We look back 
upon these uninspired predictions, and almost recoil from the ob- 
ligation they imply. By us must these fair visions be realized ; 
by us must be fulfilled these high promises, which burst in trying- 
hours from the longing hearts of the champions of truth. There 
are no more continents or worlds to be revealed. Atlantis hath 
arisen from the ocean ; the farthest Thule is reached ; there are 
no more retreats beyond the sea, no more discoveries, no more 
hopes. Here, then, a mighty work is to be fulfilled, or never, by 
the race of mortals. The man, who looks with tenderness on the 
sufferings of good men in other times ; the descendant of the pil- 
grims, who cherishes the memory of his fathers ; the patriot, who 
feels an honest glow at the majesty of the system of which he is a 
member ; the scholar, who beholds with rapture the long-sealed 
book of unprejudiced truth opened for all to read, — these are 
they by whom these auspices are to be accomplished. Yes, 
brethren, it is by the intellect of the country, that the mighty 
mass is to be inspired ; that its parts are to communicate and 
sympathize, its bright progress to be adorned with becoming 
refinements, its strong sense uttered, its character reflected, its 
feelings interpreted to its own children, to other regions, and to 
after-ages. 

Meantime, the years are rapidly passing away, and gathering 
importance in their course. With the present year will be com- 
pleted the half century from that most important era in human 
history, the commencement of our revolutionary war. The jubilee 
of our national existence is at hand. The space of time that has 
elapsed from that momentous date, has laid down in the dust, 
which the blood of many of them had already hallowed, most of 
the great men to whom, under Providence, we owe our national 
existence and privileges. A few still survive among us, to reap 
the rich fruits of their labors and sufferings; and one* has yielded 
himself to the united voice of a people, and returned, in his age, to 
receive the gratitude of the nation, to whom he devoted his youth. 
It is recorded on the pages of American history, that when this 
friend of our country applied to our commissioners at Paris, in 
1776, for a passage in the first ship they should despatch to 



* General La Favette, who was present at the delivery of this oration. 

37 In 



434 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION, &c. 



America, they were obliged to answer him (so low and abject 
was then our dear native land), that they possessed not the means 
nor the credit sufficient for providing a single vessel in all the 
ports of France. " Then," exclaimed the youthful hero, " I will 
provide my own ;" and it is a literal fact, that, when all America 
was too poor to offer him so much as a passage to our shores, he 
left, in his tender youth, the bosom qf home, of happiness, of 
wealth, of rank, to plunge in the dust and blood of our inauspicious 
struggle. 

Welcome, friend of our fathers, to our shores ! Happy are our 
eyes that behold those venerable features. Enjoy a triumph, 
such as never conqueror or monarch enjoyed — the assurance that, 
throughout America, there is not a bosom, which does not beat 
with joy and gratitude at the sound of your name. You have 
already met and saluted, or will soon meet, the few that remain of 
the ardent patriots, prudent counsellors, and brave warriors, with 
whom you were associated in achieving our liberty. But you 
have looked round in vain for the faces of many who would have 
lived years of pleasure on a day like this, with their old companion 
in arms and brother in peril. Lincoln, and Greene, and Knox, and 
Hamilton, are gone ; the heroes of Saratoga and Yorktown have 
fallen before the only foe they could not meet. Above all, the 
first of heroes and of men, the friend of your youth, the more than 
friend of his country, rests in the bosom of the soil he redeemed. 
On the banks of his Potomac, he lies in glory and peace. You 
will revisit the hospitable shades of Mount Vernon ; but him whom 
you venerated as we did, you will not meet at its door. His voice 
of consolation, which reached you in the Austrian dungeons, cannot 
now break its silence to bid you welcome to his own roof. But 
the grateful children of America will bid you welcome, in his 
name. Welcome, thrice welcome to our shores ; and whitherso- 
ever throughout the limits of the continent your course shall take 
you, the ear that hears you shall bless you, the eye that sees you 
shall bear witness to you, and every tongue exclaim, with heartfelt 
joy, Welcome, welcome, La Fayette ! 



435 



AN ADDRESS, 

DELIVERED AT THE LAYING OF 

THE CORNER-STONE OF THE BUNKER HILL MONUMENT, 
june 17, 1825. 
BY DANIEL WEBSTER. 

This uncounted multitude before me, and around me, proves 
the feeling which the occasion has excited. These thousands of 
human faces, glowing with sympathy and joy, and, from the im- 
pulses of a common gratitude, turned reverently to heaven, in this 
spacious temple of the firmament, proclaim that the day, the place, 
and the purpose of our assembling, have made a deep impression 
on our hearts. 

If, indeed, there be any thing in local association fit to affect the 
mind of man, we need not strive to repress the emotions which 
agitate us here. We are among the sepulchres of our fathers. 
We are on ground distinguished by their valor, their constancy, 
and the shedding of their blood. We are here, not to fix an 
uncertain date in our annals, nor to draw into notice an obscure 
and unknown spot. If our humble purpose had never been con- 
ceived, if we ourselves had never been born, the 17th of June, 
1775, would have been a day on which all subsequent history 
would have poured its light, and the eminence where we stand, a 
point of attraction to the eyes of successive generations. But we 
are Americans. We live in what may be called the early age of 
this great continent ; and we know that our posterity, through all 
time, are here to suffer and enjoy the allotments of humanity. 
We see before us a probable train of great events ; we know that 
our own fortunes have been happily cast ; and it is natural, there- 
fore, that we should be moved by the contemplation of occur- 
rences which have guided our destiny before many of us were 
bora, and settled the condition in which we should pass that 
portion of our existence, which God allows to men on earth. 

We do not read even of the discovery of this continent without 
feeling something of a personal interest in the event ; without being 
reminded how much it has affected our own fortunes, and our own 
existence. It is more impossible for us, therefore, than for others, 
to contemplate with unaffected minds that interesting, I may say, 
that most touching and pathetic, scene, when the great discoverer 



436 



MR. WEBSTER'S ADDRESS 



of America stood on the deck of his shattered bark, the shades of 
night falling on the sea, yet no man sleeping — tossed on the billows 
of an unknown ocean, yet the stronger billows of alternate hope 
and despair tossing his own troubled thoughts — extending forward 
his harassed frame, straining westward his anxious and eager eyes, 
till Heaven at last granted him a moment of rapture and ecstasy, 
in blessing his vision with the sight of the unknown world. 

Nearer to our times, more closely connected with our fates, and 
therefore still more interesting to our feelings and affections, is the 
settlement of our own country by colonists from England. We 
cherish every memorial of these worthy ancestors ; we celebrate 
their patience and fortitude ; w T e admire their daring enterprise , 
we teach our children to venerate their piety ; and we are justly 
proud of being descended from men who have set the world an 
example of founding civil institutions on the great and united prin- 
ciples of human freedom and human knowledge. To us, their 
children, the story of their labors and sufferings can never be 
without its interest. We shall not stand unmoved on the shore 
of Plymouth, while the sea continues to wash it ; nor will our 
brethren in another early and ancient colony, forget the place of 
its first establishment, till their river shall cease to flow by it. No 
vigor of youth, no maturity of manhood, will lead the nation to 
forget the spots where its infancy was cradled and defended. 

But the great event in the history of the continent, which we 
are now met here to commemorate, — that prodigy of modern 
times, at once the wonder and the blessing of the world, — is the 
American revolution. In a day of extraordinary prosperity and 
happiness, of high national honor, distinction and power, we are 
brought together, in this place, by our love of country, by pur 
admiration of exalted character, by our gratitude for signal services 
and patriotic devotion. 

The society, whose organ I am, was formed for the purpose of 
rearing some honorable and durable monument to the memory of 
the early friends of American independence. They have thought 
that, for this subject, no time could be more propitious than the 
present prosperous and peaceful period ; that no place could claim 
preference over this memorable spot; and that no day could be 
more auspicious to the undertaking, than the anniversary of the 
battle which .was here fought. The foundation of that monument 
we have now laid. With solemnities suited to the occasion, with 
prayers to Almighty God for his blessing ; and in the midst of this 
cloud of witnesses, we have begun the w T ork. We trust it will be 
prosecuted, — and that, springing from a broad foundation, rising 
high in massive solidity and unadorned grandeur, it may remain, as 
long as Heaven permits the work of man to last, a fit emblem, both 
of the events in memory of which it is raised, and of the gratitude 
of those who have reared it. 



AT BUNKER HILL. 



437 



We know, indeed, that the record of illustrious actions is most 
safely deposited in the universal remembrance of mankind. We 
know, that if we could cause this structure to ascend, not only till 
it reached the skies, but till it pierced them, its broad surfaces 
could stili contain but part of that, which, in an age of knowledge, 
hath already been spread over the earth, and which history 
charges itself with making known to all future times. We know, 
that no inscription on entablatures less broad than the earth itself, 
can carry information of the events we commemorate, where it 
has not already gone ; and that no structure, which shall not out- 
live the duration of letters and knowledge among men, can pro- 
long the memorial. But our object is, by this edifice to show our 
own deep sense of the value and importance of the achievements 
of our ancestors ; and, by presenting this work of gratitude to the 
eye, to keep alive similar sentiments, and to foster a constant re- 
gard for the principles of the revolution. Human beings are com- 
posed not of reason only, but of imagination also, and sentiment ; 
and that is neither wasted nor misapplied which is appropriated to 
the purpose of giving right direction to sentiments, and opening 
proper springs of feeling in the heart. Let it not be supposed 
that our object is to perpetuate national hostility, or even to cher- 
ish a mere military spirit. It is higher, purer, nobler. We con- 
secrate our work to the spirit of national independence, and we 
wish that the light of peace may rest upon it forever. We rear 
a memorial of our conviction of that unmeasured benefit, which 
has been conferred on our own land, and of the happy influences, 
which have been produced, by the same events, on the general 
interests of mankind. We come, as Americans, to mark a spot, 
which must forever be dear to us and our posterity. We wish 
that whosoever, in all coming time, shall turn his eye hither, may 
behold that the place is not undistinguished, where the first great 
battle of the revolution was fought. We wish that this structure 
may proclaim the magnitude and importance of that event, to every 
class and every age. We wish that infancy may learn the purpose 
of its erection from maternal lips, and that weary and withered age 
may behold it, and be solaced by the recollections which it suggests. 
We wish that labor may look up here, and be proud, in the midst 
of its toil. We wish that, in those days of disaster, which, as 
they come on all nations, must be expected to come on us also, 
desponding patriotism may turn its eyes hitherward, and be assured 
that the foundations of our national power still stand strong. We 
wish that this column, rising towards heaven among the pointed 
spires of so many temples dedicated to God, may contribute also to 
produce, in all minds, a pious feeling of dependence and gratitude. 
We wish, finally, that the last object on the sight of him who 
leaves his native shore, and the first to gladden his who revisits it : 
may be something which shall remind him of the liberty and the 
37* 



43S 



MR. WEBSTER'S ADDRESS 



glory of his country. Let it rise, till it meet the sun in his coming ; 
let the earliest light of the morning gild it, and parting day linger 
and play on its summit. 

We live in a most extraordinary age. Events so various and so 
important, that they might crowd and distinguish centuries, are, in 
our times, compressed within the compass of a single life. When 
has it happened that history has had so much to record, in the 
same term of years, as since the 17th of June, 1775? Oar own 
revolution, which, under other circumstances, might itself have 
been expected to occasion a war of half a century, has been 
achieved; twenty-four sovereign and independent stales erected; 
and a general government established over them, so safe, so wise, 
so free, so practical, that we might well wonder its establishment 
should have been accomplished so soon, were it not far the greater 
wonder that it should have been established at all. Two or three 
millions of people have been augmented to twelve ; and the great 
forests of the west prostrated beneath the arm of successful indus- 
try ; and the dwellers on the banks of the Ohio and the Mississip- 
pi become the fellow-citizens and neighbors of those who cultivate 
the hills of New England. We have a commerce that leaves no 
sea unexplored ; navies which take no law from superior force ; 
revenues adequate to all the exigencies of government, almost 
without taxation ; and peace with all nations, founded on equal 
rights and mutual respect. 

Europe, within the same period, has been agitated by a mighty 
revolution, which, while it has been felt in the individual condition 
and happiness of almost every man, has shaken to the centre her 
political fabric, and dashed against one another thrones which had 
stood tranquil for ages. On this, our continent, our own example 
has been followed ; and colonies have sprung up to be nations. 
Unaccustomed sounds of liberty and free government have reached 
us from beyond the track of the sun ; and at this moment the do- 
minion of European power, in this continent, from the place where 
we stand to the south pole, is annihilated forever. 

In the mean time, both in Europe and America, such has been 
the general progress of knowledge ; such the improvements in 
legislation, in commerce, in the arts, in letters, and above all, in 
liberal ideas, and the general spirit of the age, that the whole 
world seems changed. 

Yet, notwithstanding that this is but a faint abstract of the 
things which have happened since the day of the battle of Bunker 
Hill, we are but fifty years removed from it; and we now stand 
here, to enjoy all the blessings of our own condition, and to look 
abroad on the brightened prospects of the world, while we hold . 
still among us some of those, who were active agents in the scenes 
of 1775, and who are now here, from every quarter of New Eng- 
land, to visit, once more, and under circumstances so affecting, I 



AT BUNKER HILL. 



439 



had almost said so overwhelming, this renowned theatre of their 
courage and patriotism. 

Venerable men ! you have come down to us, from a former 
generation. Heaven has bounteously lengthened out your lives, 
that you might behold this joyous day. You are now where you 
stood fifty years ago, this very hour, with your brothers, and your 
neighbors, shoulder to shoulder, in the strife for your coun- 
try. Behold, how altered ! The same heavens are indeed over* 
your heads ; the same ocean rolls at your feet ; but all else, how- 
changed ! You hear now no roar of hostile cannon, you see no mixed 
volumes of smoke and flame rising from burning Charlestown. 
The ground strewed with the dead and the dying ; the impetuous 
charge ; the steady and successful repulse ; the loud call to repeat- 
ed assault ; the summoning of all that is manly to repeated resist- 
ance ; a thousand bosoms freely and fearlessly bared in an instant 
to whatever of terror there may be in war and death ; — all these you 
have witnessed, but you witness them no more. All is peace. 
The heights of yonder metropolis, its towers and roofs, which you 
then saw filled with wives and children and countrymen in distress 
and terror, and looking with unutterable emotions for the issue of 
the combat, have presented you to-day with the sight of its whole 
happy population, come out to welcome and greet you with a uni- 
versal jubilee. Yonder proud ships, by a felicity of position ap- 
propriately lying at the foot of this mount, and seeming fondly to 
cling around it, are not means of annoyance to you, but your 
country's own means of distinction and defence. All is peace ; 
and God has granted you this sight of your country's happiness, 
ere you slumber in the grave forever. He has allowed you to be- 
hold and to partake the reward of your patriotic toils ; and he has 
allowed us, your sons and countrymen, to meet you here, and in 
the name of the present generation, in the name of your country, 
in the name of liberty, to thank you ! 

But, alas ! you are not all here ! Time and the sword have 
thinned your ranks. Prescott, Putnam, Stark, Brooks, Read, 
Pomeroy, Bridge ! our eyes seek for you in vain amidst this bro- 
ken band. You are gathered to your fathers,, and live only to 
your country in her grateful remembrance, and your own bright 
example. But let us not too much grieve that you have met the 
common fate of men. You lived, at least, long enough to know 
that your work had been nobly and successfully accomplished. 
You lived to see your country's independence established, and to 
sheathe your swords from war. On the light of Liberty you sa\«* 
arise the light of Peace, like 

" another morn, 
Risen on mid-noon ; '' — 

and the sky, on which you closed your eyes, Wus cloudless 



440 



MR. WEBSTER'S ADDRESS 



But — ah ! — him ! , the first great martyr in this great cause : 
him ! the premature victim of his own self-devoting heart ! 
him ! the head of our civil councils, and the destined leader of 
our military bands; whom nothing brought hither but the un- 
quenchable fire of his own spirit ; him ! cut off by Providence, in 
the hour of overwhelming anxiety and thick gloom ; falling ere he 
saw the star of his country rise ; pouring out his generous blood, 
like water, before he knew whether it would fertilize a land of 
freedom or of bondage ! how shall I struggle with the emotions 
that stifle the utterance of thy name ! — Our poor work may perish ; 
but thine shall endure ! This monument may moulder away ; the 
solid ground it rests upon may sink down to a level with the sea ; 
but thy memory shall not fail ! Wheresoever among men a heart 
shall be found, that beats to the transports of patriotism and liber- 
ty, its aspirations shall be to claim kindred with thy spirit ! 

But the scene amidst which we stand does not permit us to 
confine our thoughts or our sympathies to those fearless spirits, who 
hazarded or lost their lives on this consecrated spot. We have 
the happiness to rejoice here in the presence of a most worthy 
representation of the survivors of the whole revolutionary army. 

Veterans ! you are the remnant of many a well -fought field. 
You bring with you marks of honor from Trenton and Monmouth, 
from Yorktown, Camden, Bennington and Saratoga. Veterans of 
half a century ! when, in your youthful da}^s, you put every thing 
at hazard in your country's cause, good as that cause was, and 
sanguine as youth is, still your fondest hopes did not stretch onward 
to an hour like this ! At a period to which you could not reason- 
ably have expected to arrive ; at a moment of national prosperity, 
such as you could never have foreseen, you are now met, here, to 
enjoy the fellowship of old soldiers, and to receive the overflow- 
ings of a universal gratitude. 

But your agitated countenances and your heaving breasts inform 
me, that even this is not an unmixed joy. I perceive that a tu- 
mult of contending feelings rushes upon you. The images of the 
dead, as well as the persons of the living, throng to your embraces. 
The scene overwhelms you, and I turn from it. May the Father 
of all mercies smile upon your declining years, and bless them ! 
And when you shall here have exchanged your embraces ; when 
you shall once more have pressed the hands which have been so 
often extended to give succor in adversity, or grasped in the exul- 
tation of victory ; then look abroad into this lovely land, which your 
young valor defended, and mark the happiness with which it is filled ; 
yea, look abroad into the whole earth, and see what a name you 
have contributed to give to your country, and what a praise you 
have added to freedom, and then rejoice in the sympathy and 
gratitude which beam upon your last days from the improved con 
diti'o i of mankind. 



AT BUNKER HILL. 



441 



The occasion does not require of me any particular account 
of the battle of the 17th of June, nor any detailed narrative of 
the events which immediately preceded it. These are familiarly 
known to all. In the progress of the great and interesting con- 
troversy, Massachusetts and the town of Boston had become early 
and marked objects of the displeasure of the British parliament. 
This had been manifested, in the act for altering the government 
of the province, and in that for shutting up the port of Boston. 
Nothing sheds more honor on our early history, and nothing better 
shows how little the feelings and sentiments of the colonies were 
known or regarded in England, than the impression which these 
measures every where produced in America. It had been antici- 
pated, that while the other colonies would be terrified by the 
severity of the punishment inflicted on Massachusetts, the other 
seaports would be governed by a mere spirit of gain ; and that, 
as Boston was now cut off from all commerce, the unexpected 
advantage, which this blow on her was calculated to confer on 
other towns, would be greedily enjoyed. How miserably such 
reasoners deceived themselves ! How little they knew of the 
depth, and the strength, and the intenseness of that feeling of 
resistance to illegal acts of power, which possessed the whole 
American people ! Every where the unworthy boon was rejected 
with scorn. The fortunate occasion was seized, every where, to 
show to the whole world, that the colonies were swayed by no 
local interest, no partial interest, no selfish interest. The tempta- 
tion to profit by the punishment of Boston was strongest to our 
neighbors of Salem. Yet Salem was precisely the place where 
this miserable proffer was spurned, in a tone of the most lofty 
self-respect, and the most indignant patriotism. " We are deeply 
affected," said its inhabitants, " with the sense of our public 
calamities ; but the miseries that are now rapidly hastening on our 
brethren in the capital of the province, greatly excite our commis- 
eration. By shutting up the port of Boston, some imagine that 
the course of trade might be turned hither and to our benefit. 
But we must be dead to every idea of justice, lost to all feelings 
of humanity, could we indulge a thought to seize on wealth, and 
raise our fortunes on the ruin of our suffering neighbors." These 
noble sentiments were not confined to our immediate vicinity. In 
that day of general affection and brotherhood, the blow given to 
Boston, smote on every patriotic heart from one end of the country 
to the other. Virginia and the Carolinas, as well as Connecticut 
and New Hampshire, felt and proclaimed the cause to be their 
own. The continental congress, then holding its first session in 
Philadelphia, expressed its sympathy for the suffering inhabitants 
of Boston ; and addresses were received from all quarters, assuring 
them that the cause was a common one, and should be met by 

Kkk 



442 



MR. WEBSTER'S ADDRESS • 



common efforts and common sacrifices. The congress of Massa- 
chusetts responded to these assurances, — and in an address to the 
congress at Philadelphia, bearing the official signature, perhaps 
among the last, of the immortal Warren, notwithstanding the 
severity of its suffering and the magnitude of the dangers which 
threatened it, it was declared, that this colony £; is ready, at all 
times, to spend and to be spent in the cause of America." 

But the hour drew nigh, which was to put professions to the 
proof, and to determine whether the authors of these mutual 
pledges were ready to seal them in blood. The tidings of Lex- 
ington and Concord had no sooner spread, than it was universally 
felt that the time was at last come for action. A spirit pervaded all 
ranks, not transient, not boisterous, but deep, solemn, determined, 

• 

" totamque infusa per artus 
Mens agitat molem, et magno se corpore miscet." 

War, on their own soil and at their own doors, was, indeed, a 
strange work to the yeomanry of New 7 England. But their con- 
sciences were convinced of its necessity, their country called them 
to it, and they did not withhold themselves from the perilous trial. 
The ordinary occupations of life were abandoned. The plough 
was stayed in the unfinished furrow; wives gave up their husbands, 
and mothers gave up their sons, to the battles of a civil war. 
Death might come, in honor, on the field ; it might come, in 
disgrace, on the scaffold. For either and for both they were 
prepared. The sentiment of Quincy was full in their hearts. 
et Blandishments," said that distinguished son of genius and patri- 
otism, "will not fascinate us, nor will threats of a halter intimidate; 
for, under God, we are determined that wheresoever, whensoever, 
or howsoever we shall be called to make our exit,, we will die 
free men." 

The 17th of June saw the four New England colonies standing 
here, side by side, to triumph or to fall together ; and there was 
with them, from that moment to the end of the war, what, I hope, 
will remain with them forever, one cause, one country, one heart. 

The battle of Bunker Hill was attended with the most important 
effects, beyond its immediate result as a military engagement. It 
created, at once, a state of open, public war. There could now 
be no longer a question of proceeding against individuals as guilty 
of treason or rebellion. That fearful crisis was past. The appeal 
now lay to the sw T ord, — and the only question was, whether the 
spirit and the resources of the people would hold out, till the ob- 
ject should be accomplished. Nor were its general consequences 
confined to our own country. The previous proceedings of the 
colonies, their appeals, resolutions, and addresses, had made then 
cause known to Europe. Without boasting, we may say that, ir. 



AT BUNKER HILL. 



443 



no age or country, has the public cause been maintained with more 
force of argument, more power of illustration, or more of that 
persuasion which excited feeling and elevated principle can alone 
bestow, than the revolutionary state-papers exhibit. These papers 
will forever deserve to be studied, not only for the spirit which 
they breathe, but for the ability with which they were written. 

To this able vindication of their cause, the colonies had now 
added a practical and severe proof of their own true devotion to 
it, and evidence also of the power which they could bring to its 
support. All now saw, that, if America fell, she would not fall 
without a struggle. Men felt sympathy and regard, as well as 
surprise, when they beheld these infant states, remote, unknown, 
unaided, encounter the power of England, and, in the first consid- 
erable battle, leave more of their enemies dead on the field, in 
proportion to the number of combatants, than they had recently 
known in the wars of Europe. 

Information of these events circulating through Europe, at length 
reached the ears of one who now hears me. He has not forgotten 
the emotion which the fame of Bunker Hill, and the name of 
Warren, excited in his youthful breast. 

Sir, we are assembled to commemorate the establishment of 
great public principles of liberty, and to do honor to the distin- 
guished dead. The occasion is too severe for eulogy to the living. 
But, sir, your interesting relation to this country, the peculiar cir- 
cumstances which surround you and surround us, call on me to 
express the happiness which we derive from your presence and aid 
in this solemn commemoration. 

Fortunate, fortunate man ! with what measure of devotion will 
you not thank God for the circumstances of your extraordinary 
life ! You are connected with both hemispheres and with two 
generations. Heaven saw fit to ordain, that the electric spark of 
liberty should be conducted, through you, from the new world to 
the old ; and we, who are now here to perform this duty of patri- 
otism, have all of us long ago received it in charge from our fathers 
to cherish your name and your virtues. You will account it an 
instance of your good fortune, sir, that you crossed the seas to visit 
us at a time which enables you to be present at this solemnity. 
You now behold the field, the renown of which reached you in 
the heart of France, and caused a thrill in your ardent bosom. 
You see the lines of the little redoubt thrown up by the incredible 
diligence of Prescott ; defended, to the last extremity, by his lion- 
hearted valor; and within which the corner-stone of our monument 
has now taken its position. You see where Warren fell, and where 
Parker, Gardner, McCleary, Moore, and other early patriots, fell 
with him. Those who survived that day, and whose lives have 
been prolonged to the present hour, are now around you. Som^ 



444 



MR. WEBSTER'S ADDRESS 



of them you have known in the trying scenes of the war. Behold ! 
they now stretch forth their feeble arms to embrace you. Behold ! 
they raise their trembling voices to invoke the blessing of God on 
you, and yours, forever. 

Sir, you have assisted us in laying the foundation of this edifice. 
You have heard us rehearse, with our feeble commendation, the 
names of departed patriots. Sir, monuments and eulogy belong 
to the dead. We give them, this day, to Warren and his asso- 
ciates. On other occasions, they have been given to your more 
immediate companions in arms, — to Washington, to Greene, to 
Gates, Sullivan, and Lincoln. Sir, we have become reluctant to 
grant these, our highest and last honors, further. We would 
gladly hold them yet back from the little remnant of that immortal 
band. Serus in ccelum redeas. Illustrious as are your merits, yet 
far, oh, very far distant be the day, when any inscription shall bear 
your name, or any tongue pronounce its eulogy ! 

The leading reflection to which this occasion seems to invite us, 
respects the great changes which have happened in the fifty years 
since the battle of Bunker Hill was fought. And it peculiarly 
marks the character of the present age, that, in looking at these 
changes, and in estimating their effect on our condition, we are 
obliged to consider, not what has been done in our own country 
only, but in others also. In these interesting times, while nations 
are making separate and individual advances in improvement, they 
make, too, a common progress ; like vessels on a common tide, 
propelled by- the gales at different rates, according to their several 
structure and management, but all moved forward by one mighty 
current beneath, strong enough to bear onward whatever does not 
sink beneath it. 

A chief distinction of the present day is a community of opinions 
and knowledge amongst men, in different nations, existing in a de- 
gree heretofore unknown. Knowledge has, in our time, triumphed, 
and is triumphing, over distance, over difference of languages, over 
diversity of habits, over prejudice, and over bigotry. The civilized 
and Christian world is fast learning the great lesson, that difference 
of nation does not imply necessary hostility, and that all contact 
need not be w r ar. The w 7 hole world is becoming a common field 
'or intellect to act in. Energy of mind, genius, power, whereso- 
ever it exists, may speak out in any tongue, and the world will 
hear it. A great chord of sentiment and feeling runs through two 
continents, and vibrates over both. Every breeze wafts intelli- 
gence from country to country ; every wave rolls it ; all give it 
forth, and all in turn receive it. There is a vast commerce of 
ideas. There are marts and exchanges for intellectual discoveries, 
and a wonderful fellowship of those individual intelligences which 
make up the mind and opinion of the age. Mind is the great 



AT BUNKER HILL. 



445 



lever of all things; human thought is the process by which human 
ends are ultimately answered; and the diffusion of knowledge, so 
astonishing in the last half century, has rendered innumerable minds, 
variously gifted by nature, competent to be competitors, or fellow- 
workers, on the theatre of intellectual operation. 

From these causes, important improvements have taken place in 
the personal condition of individuals. Generally speaking, mankind 
are not only better fed, and better clothed, but they are able also 
to enjoy more leisure ; they possess more refinement and more 
self-respect. A superior tone of education, manners, and habits, 
prevails. This remark, most true in its application to our own 
country, is also partly true when applied elsewhere. It is proved 
by the vastly-augmented consumption of those articles of manufac- 
ture and of commerce which contribute to the comforts and the de- 
cencies of life ; an augmentation which has far outrun the progress 
of population. And while the unexampled and almost incredible 
use of machinery would seem to supply the place of labor, labor still 
iinds its occupation and its reward ; so wisely has Providence adjust- 
ed men's wants and desires to their condition and their capacity. 

Any adequate survey, however, of the progress made in the 
last half century in the polite and the mechanic arts, in machinery 
and manufactures, in commerce and agriculture, in letters and in 
science, would require volumes. I must abstain wholly from these 
subjects, and turn, for a moment, to the contemplation of what has 
been done on the great question of politics and government. This 
is the master topic of the age ; and during the whole fifty years it 
has intensely occupied the thoughts of men. The nature of civil 
government, its ends and uses, have been canvassed and investi- 
gated ; ancient opinions attacked and defended ; new ideas recom- 
mended and resisted, by whatever power the mind of man could 
bring to the controversy. From the closet and the public halls, 
the debate has been transferred to the field ; and the world has 
been shaken by wars of unexampled magnitude, and the greatest 
variety of fortune. A day of peace has at length succeeded ; and 
now that the strife has subsided, and the smoke cleared away, we 
, may begin to see what has actually been done, permanently chang- 
ing the state and condition of human society. And without dwelling 
on particular circumstances, it is most apparent that, from the before- 
mentioned causes of augmented knowledge and improved individual 
condition, a real, substantial, and important change has taken place, 
and is taking place, greatly beneficial, on the whole, to human lib- 
erty and human happiness. 

The great wheel of political revolution began to move in Amer- 
ica. Here its rotation was guarded, regular, and safe. Transferred 
to the other continent, from unfortunate, but natural, causes, it re- 
ceived an irregular and violent impulse ; it whirled along with t 
38 " 



446 MR. WEBSTER'S ADDRESS 



fearful celerity, till, at length, like the chariot-wheels in the races 
of antiquity, it took fire from the rapidity of its own motion, and 
blazed onward, spreading conflagration and terror around. 

We learn, from the result of this experiment, how fortunate was 
our own condition, and how admirably the character of our people 
was calculated for making the great example of popular govern- 
ments. The possession of power did not turn the heads of the 
American people, for they had long been in the habit of exercising 
a great portion of self-control. Although the paramount authority 
of the parent state existed over them, yet a large field of legislation 
had always been open to our colonial assemblies. They were 
accustomed to representative bodies and the forms of free govern- 
ment; they understood the doctrine of the division of power among 
different branches, and the necessity of checks on each. The 
character of our countrymen, moreover, was sober, moral, and reli- 
gious; and there was little in the change to shock their feelings of 
justice and humanity, or even to disturb an honest prejudice. We 
had no domestic throne to overturn, no privileged orders to cast 
down, no violent changes of property to encounter. In the Amer- 
ican revolution, no man sought or wished for more than to defend 
and enjoy his own. None hoped for plunder or for spoil. Rapacity 
was unknown to it ; the axe was not among the instruments of its 
accomplishment ; and we all know that it could not have lived a 
single day under any well-founded imputation of possessing a ten- 
dency adverse to the Christian religion. 

It need not surprise us, that, under circumstances less auspicious, 
political revolutions elsewhere, even when well intended, have 
terminated differently. It is, indeed, a great achievement — it is 
the master-work of the world — to establish governments entirely 
popular, on lasting foundations; nor is it easy, indeed, to introduce 
the popular principle at all into governments to which it has been 
altogether a stranger. It cannot be doubted, however, that Europe 
has come out of the contest in which she has been so long engaged, 
with greatly superior knowledge, and, in many respects, a highly 
improved condition. Whatever benefit has been acquired, is likely 
to be retained, for it consists mainly in the acquisition of more en- 
lightened ideas. And although kingdoms and provinces may be 
wrested from the hands that hold them, in the same manner they 
were obtained; although ordinary and vulgar power may, in human 
affairs, be lost as it has been won; yet it is the glorious prerogative 
of the empire of knowledge, that what it gains it never loses. On 
the contrary, it increases by the multiple of its own power ; all its 
ends become means ; all its attainments, helps to new conquests. 
Its whole abundant harvest is but so much seed wheat, and nothing 
has ascertained, and nothing can ascertain, the amount of ultimate 
product 



A.T BUNKER HILL. 



447 



Under the influence of this rapidly-increasing knowledge, the 
people have begun, in all forms of government, to think and to 
reason on affairs of state. Regarding government as an institution 
for the public good, they demand a knowledge of its operations, 
and a participation in its exercise. A call for the representative 
system, wherever it is not enjoyed, and where there is already 
intelligence enough to estimate its value, is perseveringly made. 
Where men may speak out, they demand it ; where the bayonet 
is at their throats, they pray for it. 

When Louis XIV. said, " I am the state," he expressed the 
essence of the doctrine of unlimited power. By the rules of that 
system, the people are disconnected from the state ; they are its 
subjects, — it is their lord. These ideas, founded in the love of 
power, and long supported by the excess and the abuse of it, are 
yielding, in our age, to other opinions ; and the civilized world 
seems at last to be proceeding to the conviction of that fundamen- 
tal and manifest truth, that the powers of government are but a 
trust, and that they cannot be lawfully exercised but for the good 
of the community. As knowledge is more and more extended, 
this conviction becomes more and more general. Knowledge, in 
truth, is the great sun in the firmament. Life and power are scat- 
tered with all its beams. The prayer of the Grecian combatant, 
when enveloped in unnatural clouds and darkness, is the appropri- 
ate political supplication for the people of every country not yet 
blessed with free institutions : — 

" Dispel this cloud ; the light of heaven restore ; 
Give me to see — and Ajax asks no more." 

We may hope that the growing influence of enlightened senti- 
ments will promote the permanent peace of the world. Wars, to 
maintain family alliances, to uphold or to cast down dynasties, to 
regulate successions to thrones, which have occupied so much room 
in the history of modern times, if not less likely to happen at all, 
will be less likely to become general, and involve many nations, as 
the great principle shall be more and more established, that the 
interest of the world is peace, and its first great statute, that every 
nation possesses the power of establishing a government for itself. 
But public opinion has attained also an influence over governments 
which do not admit the popular principle into their organization. 
A necessary respect for the judgment of the world operates, in 
some measure, as a control over the most unlimited forms of au 
thority. It is owing, perhaps, to this truth, that the interesting 
struggle of the Greeks has been suffered to go on so long, without 
a direct interference, either to wrest that country from its present 
masters, and add it to other powers, or to execute the system of 
pacification by force, and, with united strength, lay the neck 01 



448 



MR. WEBSTER'S ADDRESS 



Christian and civilized Greece at the foot of the barbarian Turk. 
Let us thank God that we live in an age when something has 
influence besides the bayonet, and when the sternest authority 
does not venture to encounter the scorching power of public re- 
proach. Any attempt of the kind I have mentioned, should be 
met by one universal burst of indignation ; the air of the civilized 
world ought to be made too warm to be comfortably breathed by 
any who would hazard it. 

It is, indeed, a touching reflection, that while, in the fulness of 
our country's happiness, we rear this monument to her honor, we 
look for instruction in our undertaking to a country which is now 
in fearful contest, not for works of art or memorials of glory, but 
for her own existence. Let her be assured that she is not forgot- 
ten in the world ; that her efforts are applauded, and that constant 
prayers ascend for her success. And let us cherish a confident 
hope for her final triumph. If the true spark of religious and civil 
liberty be kindled, it will burn. Human agency cannot extinguish 
it. Like the earth's central fire, it may be smothered for a time ; 
the ocean may overwhelm it ; mountains may press it down ; but 
its inherent and unconquerable force will heave both the ocean 
and the land, and at some time or another, in some place or 
another, the volcano will break out and flame up to heaven. 

Among the great events of the half century, we must reckon, 
certainly, the revolution of South America ; and we are not likely 
to overrate the importance of that revolution, either to the people 
of the country itself, or to the rest of the world. The late Spanish 
colonies, now independent states, under circumstances less favorable, 
doubtless, than attended our own revolution, have yet successfully 
commenced their national existence. They have accomplished the 
great object of establishing their independence ; they are known 
and acknowledged in the world ; and although, in regard to their 
systems of government, their sentiments on religious toleration, and 
their provisions for public instruction, they may have yet much to 
learn, it must be admitted that they have risen to the condition of 
settled and established states more rapidly than could have been 
reasonably anticipated. They already furnish an exhilarating 
example of the difference between free governments and despotic 
misrule. Their commerce, at this moment, creates a new activity 
in all the great marts of the world. They show themselves able, 
by an exchange of commodities, to bear a useful part in the inter- 
course of nations. A new spirit of enterprise and industry begins 
to prevail ; all the great interests of society receive a salutary 
impulse ; and the progress of information not only testifies to an 
improved condition, but constitutes, itself, the highest and most 
essential improvement. 

When the battle of Bunker Hill was fought, the existence of 



AT BUNKER HILL. 



449 



South America was scarcely felt in the civilized world. The thir- 
teen little colonies of North America habitually called themselves 
the " Continent." Borne down by colonial subjugation, monopoly, 
and bigotry, these vast regions of the south were hardly visible 
above the horizon. But, in our day, there hath been, as it were, 
a new creation. The southern hemisphere emerges from the sea. 
Its lofty mountains begin to lift themselves into the light of heaven : 
its broad and fertile plains stretch out in beauty to the eye of civil- 
ized man, and, at the mighty being of the voice of political liberty, 
the waters of darkness retire. 

And, now, let us indulge an honest exultation in the conviction 
of the benefit which the example of our country has produced, and 
is likely to produce, on human freedom and human happiness. 
And let us endeavor to comprehend, in all its magnitude, and to 
feel, in all its importance, the part assigned to us in the great dra- 
ma of human affairs. We are placed at the head of the system of 
representative and popular governments. Thus far, our example 
shows that such governments are compatible, not only with respec- 
tability and power, but with repose, with peace, with security of 
personal rights, with good laws, and a just administration. 

We are not propagandists. Wherever other systems are pre- 
ferred, either as being thought better in themselves, or as better 
suited to existing condition, we leave the preference to be enjoyed. 
Our history hitherto proves, however, that the popular form is 
practicable, and that, with wisdom and knowledge, men may gov- 
ern themselves ; and the duty incumbent on us is, to preserve the 
consistency of this cheering example, and take care that nothing- 
may weaken its authority with the world. If, in our case, the 
representative system ultimately fail, popular governments musl 
be pronounced impossible. No combination of circumstances more 
favorable to the experiment can ever be expected to occur. The 
last hopes of mankind, therefore, rest with us ; and if it should be 
pvoclaimed, that our example had become an argument against the 
experiment, the knell of popular liberty would be sounded through- 
out the earth. 

These are excitements to duty ; but they are not suggestions 
of doubt. Our history and our condition, all that is gone before 
us, and all that surrounds us, authorize the belief, that popular 
governments, though subject to occasional variations, perhaps not 
always for the better, in form, may yet, in their general character, 
be as durable and permanent as other systems. We know, indeed, 
that, in our country, any other is impossible. The principle of 
free governments adheres to the American soil. It is bedded in 
it — immovable as its mountains. 

And let the sacred obligations which have devolved on this 
generation, and on us, sink deep into our hearts. Those are daily 
33* Lll 



450 



MR. WEBSTER'S ADDRESS, &c. 



dropping from among us, who established our liberty and our gov- 
ernment. The great trust now descends to new hands. Let us 
apply ourselves to that which is presented to us, as our appro- 
priate object. We can win no laurels in a war for independence. 
Earlier and worthier hands have gathered them all. Nor are there 
places for us by the side of Solon, and Alfred, and other founders 
of states. Our fathers have filled them. But there remains to us 
a great duty of defence and preservation ; and there is opened to 
us, also, a noble pursuit, to which the spirit of the times strongly 
invites us. Our proper business is improvement. Let our age be 
the age of improvement. In a day of peace, let us advance the 
arts of peace and the works of peace. Let us develop the re- 
sources of our land, call forth its powers, build up its institutions, 
promote all its great interests, and see whether we also, in our day 
and generation, may not perform something worthy to be remem- 
bered. Let us cultivate a true spirit of union and harmony. In 
pursuing the great objects which our condition points out to us, 
let us act under a settled conviction, and an habitual feeling, that 
these twenty-four states are one country. Let our conceptions be 
enlarged to the circle of our duties. Let us extend our ideas over 
the whole of the vast field in which we are called to act. Let our 
object be, our country, our whole country, and nothing but our 
country. And, by the blessing of God, may that country itself 
oecome a vast and splendid monument, not of oppression and ter- 
ror, but of wisdom, of peace, and of liberty, upon which the world 
may gaze, with admiration, forever. 



451 



AN ORATION, 

DELIVERED 

AT CAMBRIDGE, ON THE FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY 
OF 

THE DECLARATION OF THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 

By EDWARD EVERETT. 

Fellow Citizens, 
It belongs to us, with, strong propriety, to celebrate this da\ 
The town of Cambridge, and the county of Middlesex, are rilled 
with the vestiges of the revolution ; whithersoever we turn our 
eyes, we behold some memento of its glorious scenes. Within 
the walls, in which we are now assembled, was convened the first 
provincial congress, after its adjournment at Concord. The rural 
magazine at Medford reminds us of one of the earliest acts of 
British aggression. The march of both divisions of the royal 
army, on the memorable nineteenth of April, was through the 
limits of Cambridge ; in the neighboring towns of Lexington and 
Concord, the first blood of the revolution was shed; in W'est 
Cambridge, the royal convoy of provisions was, the same day, 
gallantly surprised by the aged citizens, who staid to protect 
their hemes, while their sons pursued the foe. Here the first 
American army was formed ; from this place, on the seventeenth 
of June, was detached the Spartan band, that immortalized the 
heights of Charlestown, and consecrated that day, with blood and 
fire, to the cause of American liberty. Beneath the venerable 
elm, which still shades the south-western corner of the common, 
General Washington first unsheathed his sword at the head of an 
American army, and to that seat * was wont every Sunday to 
repair, to join in the supplications which were made for the welfare 
of his country. 

How changed is now the scene ! The foe is gone ! The din 
and the desolation of war are passed ; science has long resumed 
her station in the shades of our venerable university, no longer 

* The first wall pew, on the right hand of the pulpit. 



452 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



glittering with arms ; the anxious war-council is no longer in ses- 
sion, to offer a reward for the discovery of the best mode of making 
saltpetre, — an unpromising stage of hostilities, when an army of 
twenty thousand men is in the field in front of the foe ; the tall 
grass now waves in the trampled sally-port of some of the rural 
redoubts, that form a part of the simple lines of circumvallation, 
within which a half-armed American militia held the flower of the 
British army blockaded : the plough has done, what the English 
batteries could not do, — has levelled others of them with the earth ; 
and the men, the great and good men, their warfare is over, and 
they have gone quietly down to the dust they redeemed from 
oppression. 

At the close of a half century, since the declaration of our 
independence, we are assembled to commemorate that great and 
happy event. We come together, not because it needs, but 
because it deserves these acts of celebration. We do not meet each 
other, and exchange our felicitations, because we should otherwise 
fall into forgetfulness of this auspicious era, but because we owe 
it to our fathers and to our children, to mark its return with 
grateful festivities. The major part of this assembly is composed 
of those who had not yet engaged in the active scenes of life 
when the revolution commenced. We come not to applaud our 
own work, but to pay a filial tribute to the deeds of our fathers. 
It was for their children that the heroes and sages of the revolu- 
tion labored and bled. They were too wise not to know, that 
it was not personally their own cause in which they were em- 
barked; they felt that they were engaging in an enterprise 
which an entire generation must be too short to bring to its mature 
and perfect issue. The most they could promise themselves was, 
that, having cast forth the seed of liberty ; having shielded its ten- 
der germ from the stern blasts that beat upon it ; having watered 
it with the tears of waiting eyes, and the blood of brave hearts. — 
their children might gather the fruit of its branches, while those 
who planted it should moulder in peace beneath its shade. 

Nor was it only in this, that we discern their disinterestedness, 
their heroic forgetfulness of self. Not only was the independence, 
for which they struggled, a great and arduous adventure, of which 
they were to encounter the risk, and others to enjoy the benefits; 
but the oppressions, which roused them, had assumed, in their day, 
no worse form than that of a pernicious principle. No intolera- 
ble acts of oppression had ground them to the dust. They were not 
slaves rising in desperation from beneath the agonies of the lash ; 
but free men, snuffing from afar " the tainted gale of tyranny." 
The worst encroachments, on which the British ministry had ven- 
tured, might have been borne, consistently with the practical enjoy- 
ment of many of the advantages resulting from good government. 



AT CAMBRIDGE, JULY 4, 1826. 



453 



On the score of calculation alone, that generation had much better 
have paid the duties on glass, painters' colors, stamped paper, and 
tea, than have plunged into the expenses of the revolutionary war. 
But they thought not of shuffling off upon posterity the burden of 
resistance. They well understood the part which Providence had 
assigned to them. They perceived that they were called to dis- 
charge a high and perilous office to the cause of freedom ; that 
their hands were elected to strike the blow, for which near two 
centuries of preparation — ; never remitted, though often uncon- 
scious — had been making, on one side or the other, of the Atlan- 
tic. They felt that the colonies had now reached that stage in 
their growth, when the difficult problem of colonial government 
must be solved ; difficult, I call it, for such it is, to the statesman, 
whose mind is not sufficiently enlarged for the idea, that a wise 
colonial government must naturally and rightfully end in indepen- 
dence ; that even a mild and prudent sway, on the part of the 
mother country, furnishes no reason for not severing the bands of the 
colonial subjection ; and that when the rising state has passed the 
period of adolescence, the only alternative which remains, is that 
of a peaceable separation, or a convulsive rupture. 

The British ministry, at that time weaker than it had ever been 
since the infatuated reign of James II., had no knowledge of politi- 
cal science, but that which they derived from the text of official 
records. They drew their maxims, as it was happily said of one 
of them, that he did his measures, from the file. They heard 
that a distant province had resisted the execution of an act t of 
parliament. Indeed ! and what is the specific, in cases of resistance? 
— a military force ; — and two more regiments are ordered to Bos- 
ton. Again they hear, that the General Court of Massachusetts 
Bay has taken counsels subversive of the allegiance due to the 
crown. A case of a refractory corporation ; — what is to be done ? 
First try a mandamus ; and if that fails, seize the franchises into 
his majesty's hands. They never asked the great questions* 
whether nations, like man, have not the principles of growth : 
whether Providence has assigned no laws to regulate the changes in 
the condition of that most astonishing of human things, a nation 
of kindred men. They did not inquire, I will not say whether it 
were rightful and expedient, but whether it were practicable to give 
law across the Atlantic, to a people who possessed within them 
selves every imaginable element of self-government ; — a people 
rocked in the cradle of liberty, brought up to hardship, inheriting 
nothing but their rights on earth, and their hopes in heaven. 

But though the rulers of Britain appear not to have caught a 
glimpse of the great principles involved in these questions, our 
fathers had asked and answered them. They perceived, with the 
rapidity of intuition, that the hour of separation had come ; because 



454 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



a principle was assumed by the British government, which put an 
instantaneous check to the further growth of liberty. Either the 
race of civilized man happily planted on our shores, at first slowly 
and painfully reared, but at length auspiciously multiplying in 
America, is destined never to constitute a free and independent 
state ; or these measures must be resisted, which go to bind it in 
a mild but abject colonial vassalage. Either the hope must be 
forever abandoned, the hope that had been brightening and kin- 
dling toward assurance, like the glowing skies of the morning, — the 
hope that a new centre of civilization was to be planted on the 
new continent, at which the social and political institutions of the 
world may be brought to the standard of reason and truth, after 
thousands of years of degeneracy, — either this hope must be 
abandoned, and forever, or the battle was now to be fought, first 
in the political assemblies, and then, if need be, in the field. 

In the halls of legislation, scarcely can it be said that the battle 
was fought. A spectacle, indeed, seemed to be promised to the 
civilized world, of breathless interest and uncalculated consequence. 
" You are placed," said the provincial congress of Massachusetts, 
in their address to the inhabitants, of December 4th, 1774, — an ad- 
dress promulgated at the close of a session held in this very house 
where we are now convened, — " You are placed by Providence in 
a pest of honor, because it is a post of danger ; and while strug- 
gling for the noblest objects, the liberties of our country, the hap- 
piness of posterity, and the rights of human nature, the eyes, not 
onlv of North America and the whole British empire, but of all 
Europe, are upon you." * A mighty question of political right 
was at issue between the two hemispheres. Europe and Amer- 
ica, in the face of mankind, are going to plead the great cause on 
which the fate of popular government forever is suspended. One 
circumstance, and one alone, exists, to diminish the interest of the 
contention — the perilous inequality of the parties; an inequality 
far exceeding that which gives animation to a contest; and so 
great as to destroy the hope of an ably-waged encounter. On the 
one side were arrayed the two houses of the British parliament, the 
modern school of political eloquence, the arena where great minds 
had for a century and a half strenuously wrestled themselves into 
strength and power, and in better days the common and upright 
chancery of an empire, on which the sun never set. Upon the 
other side rose up the colonial assemblies of Massachusetts and 
Virginia, and the continental congress of Philadelphia, composed 
of men whose training had been within a small provincial circuit ; 
who had never before felt the inspiration which the consciousness 
of a station before the world imparts ; who brought no power into 



* Massachusetts State Papers, p. 416. 



AT CAMBRIDGE, JULY 4, 1826. 



455 



the contest but that which they drew from their cause and their 
bosoms. It is by champions like these, that the great principles 
of representative government, of chartered rights, and constitu- 
tional liberty, are to be discussed ; and surely never, in the annals 
of national controversy, was exhibited a triumph so complete of 
the seemingly weaker party, a rout so disastrous of the stronger. 
Often as it has been repeated, it will bear another repetition ; it 
never ought to be omitted in the history of constitutional liberty ; 
it ought especially to be repeated this day ; — the various addresses, 
petitions, and appeals, the correspondence, the resolutions, the le- 
gislative and popular debates, from 1764, to the declaration of 
independence, present a maturity of v political wisdom, a strength 
of argument, a gravity of style, a manly eloquence, and a moral 
courage, of which unquestionably the modern world affords no 
other example. This meed of praise, substantially accorded at 
the time by Chatham, in the British parliament, may well be re- 
peated by us. For most of the venerated men to whom it is paid, 
it is but a pious tribute to departed worth. The Lees and the 
Henries, Otis, Quincy, Warren, and Samuel Adams, the men who 
spoke those words of thrilling power, which raised and ruled the 
storm of resistance, and rang like the voice of fate across the At- 
lantic, are beyond the reach of our praise. To most of them it 
was granted to witness some of the fruits of their labors ; such 
fruit as revolutions do not often bear. Others departed at an un- 
timely hour, or nobly fell in the onset ; too soon for their country, 
too soon for liberty, too soon for every thing but their own undying 
fame. But all are not gone ; some still survive among us ; the 
favored, enviable men, to hail the jubilee of the independence 
they declared. Go back, fellow-citizens, to that day, when Jef- 
ferson and Adams composed the sub-committee who reported the 
declaration of independence. Think of the mingled sensations 
of that proud but anxious day, compared to the joy of this. 
What honor, what crown, what treasure, could the world and all 
its kingdoms afford, compared with the honor and happiness of 
having been united in that commission, and living to see its most 
wavering hopes turned into glorious reality. Venerable men ! you 
have outlived the dark days which followed your more than heroic 
deed ; you have outlived your own strenuous contention, who 
should stand first among the people whose liberty you vindicated. 
You have lived to bear to each other the respect which the nation 
bears to you both ; and each has been so happy as to exchange 
the honorable name of the leader of a party, for that more 
honorable one, the Father of his Country. While this our trib- 
ute of respect, on the jubilee of our independence, is paid to the 
gray hairs of the venerable survivor in our neighborhood ; let. 
it not less heartily be sped to him whose hand traced the lines 



456 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



of that sacred charter, which, to the end of time, has made this 
day illustrious. And is an empty profession of respect all that we 
owe to the man who can show the original draft of the declaration 
of the independence of the United States of America, in his own 
handwriting ? Ought not a title-deed like this to become the ac- 
quisition of the nation ? Ought it not to be laid up in the archives 
of the people ? Ought not the price, at which it is bought, to 
be the ease and comfort of the old age of him who drew it ? 
Ought not he, who, at the age of thirty, declared the independence 
of his country, at the age of eighty, to be secured by his country 
in the enjoyment of his own ? 

Nor let us forget, on the return of this eventful day, the men, 
who, when the conflict of counsel was over, stood forward in that 
of arms! Yet let me not, by faintly endeavoring to sketch, do 
deep injustice to the story of their exploits. The efforts of a life 
would scarce suffice to paint out this picture, in all its astonishing 
incidents, in all its mingled colors of sublimity and woe, of agony 
and triumph. But the age of commemoration is at hand. The 
voice of our fathers' blood begins to cry to us, from beneath the 
soil which it moistened. Time is bringing forward, in their proper 
relief, the men and the deeds of that high-souled day. The gen- 
eration of contemporary worthies is gone ; the crowd of the unsig- 
nalized great and good disappears ; and the leaders in war as well 
as council, are seen, in Fancy's eye, to take their stations on the 
mount of Remembrance. They come from the embattled cliffs 
of Abraham ; they start from the heaving sods of Bunker's hill ; 
they gather from the blazing lines of Saratoga and Yorktown, from 
the blood-dyed waters of the Brandy wine, from the dreary snows 
of Valley Forge, and all the hard-fought fields of the war. With 
all their wounds and all their honors, they rise and plead with us, 
for their brethren who survive ; and bid us, if indeed we cherish 
the memory of those who bled in our cause, to show our gratitude, 
not by sounding words, but by stretching out the strong arm of the 
country's prosperity, to help the veteran survivors gently down to 
their graves. 

But it is time to turn from sentiments on which it is unavailing 
to dwell. The fiftieth return of this all-important day appears to 
enjoin on us to reassert the principles of the declaration of inde- 
pendence. Have we met, fellow-citizens, to commemorate mere- 
ly the successful termination of a war? Certainly not; the. war 
of 1756 was, in its duration, nearly equal, and signalized in Amer- 
ica by the most brilliant achievements of the provincial arms. But 
no one would attempt to prevent that war, with all its glorious in- 
cidents, from gradually sinking into the shadows which time throws 
back on the deeds of men. Do we celebrate the anniversary of 



AT CAMBRIDGE, JULY 4, 1826. 



457 



our independence, merely because a vast region was severed from 
an European empire, and established a government for itself? — 
Scarcely even this : the acquisition of Louisiana, a region larger 
than the old United States, — the almost instantaneous conversion 
of a vast Spanish colonial waste into free and prosperous members 
of our republican federation (the whole effected by a single happy 
exercise of the treaty-making power), — this is an event, in nature 
not wholly unlike, in importance not infinitely beneath, the sepa- 
ration of the colonies from England, regarded merely as an historical 
transaction. But no one thinks of commemorating with festivals 
the anniversary of this cession. Perhaps not ten who hear me 
recollect the date of the treaty by which it was effected ; although 
it is, unquestionably, the most important occurrence in our history 
since the declaration of independence, and will render the admin- 
istration of Mr. Jefferson memorable as long as our republic shall 
endure. 

But it is not merely, nor chiefly, the military success, nor the 
political event, w T bich we commemorate on these patriotic anniver- 
saries. It is to mistake the principle of our celebration to speak 
of its object either as a trite theme, or as one among other impor- 
tant and astonishing incidents of the same kind in the world. The 
declaration of the independence of the United States of America, 
considered, on the one hand, as the consummation of a long train 
of measures and counsels, preparatory, even though unconsciously, 
of this event, — and, on the other hand, as the foundation of the 
systems of government which have happily been established in 
our beloved country, — deserves commemoration as the most im- 
portant event, humanly speaking, in the history of the world ; as 
forming the era from which the establishment of government on a 
rightful foundation is destined universally to date. Looking upon 
the declaration of independence as the one prominent event which 
is to represent the American system (and history will so look upon 
it), I deem it right in itself and seasonable this day to assert, that, 
while all other political revolutions, reforms, and improvements 
have been, in various ways, of the nature of palliatives and allevia- 
tions of systems essentially and irremediably vicious, this alone is 
the great discovery in political science, — the Newtonian theory of 
government, toward which the minds of all honest and sagacious 
statesmen in other times had strained, but without success, — the 
practical fulfilment of all the theories of political perfection, which 
had amused the speculations and eluded the grasp of every forme 
period and people. And although assuredly this festive hour af- 
fords but little scope for dry disquisition, and shall not be engrossed 
by me with abstract speculation, yet I shall not think I wander 
from the duties of the day, in dwelling briefly on the chain of 
ideas by which we reach this great conclusion. 

39 M m m 



458 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



The political organization of a people is, of all matters of tem- 
poral concernment, the most important. Drawn together into that 
great assemblage which we call a nation, by the social principle 
some mode of organization must exist among men ; and on that 
organization depends, more directly, more collectively, more per- 
manently than on any thing else, the condition of the individual 
members that make up the community. On the political organ- 
ization in which a people shall for generations have been reared, 
it mainly depends, whether we shall behold, in one of the brethren 
of the human family, the New Hollander, making a nauseous meal 
from the worms which he extracts from a piece of rotten wood,* 
or the African, cutting out the under jaw of his captive, to be 
strung on a wire, as a trophy of victory, while the mangled wretch 
is left to bleed to death on the field of battle ; f or whether we 
shall behold him social, civilized, Christian, — scarcely faded from 
that perfect image, in which, at the divine purpose, "Let us make 
man," 

" in beauty clad, 

With health in every vein, 

And reason throned upon his brow, 

Stepped forth immortal man." 

I am certainly aware, that between the individuals that compose 
a nation, and the nation as an organized body, there are action and 
reaction ; — that, if political institutions affect the individual, indi- 
viduals are sometimes gifted with power, and seize on opportunities 
most essentially to modify institutions. Nor am I at all disposed 
to agitate the scholastic question, which w 7 as first, in the order of 
nature or time, men forming governments, or governments deter- 
mining the condition of men. But, having long acted and reacted 
upon each other, it needs no argument to prove, that political 
institutions get to be infinitely the most important agent in fixing 
the condition of individuals, and even in determining in what man- 
ner and to what extent individual capacity shall be exerted, and 
individual character formed. While other causes do unquestion- 
ably operate (some of them, such as national descent, physical 
race, climate, and geographical position, very powerfully), yet of 
none of them is the effect constant, uniform and prompt ; — while, 
I believe, it is impossible to point out an important change in the 
political organization of people, — a change by which it has been 
rendered more or less favorable to liberty, — without discovering a 
correspondent effect on their prosperity. 

Such is the infinite importance to the nations of men of the 
political organization which prevails among them. The most mo- 
mentous practical question, therefore, of course, is, in what way a 

* Malthus's Essay on Population, vol. i. p. 33. Amer. ed. 
t Edwards's History of the West Indies, vol. ii. p. 68, 3d ed. 



AT CAMBRIDGE, JULY 4, 1826. 



459 



people shall determine the political organization under which it 
will live ; or, in still broader terms, what is a right foundation of 
government. Till the establishment, of the American constitutions, 
this question had received but one answer in the world, — I mean, 
but one which obtained for any length of time and among any 
numerous people, — and that answer was, force. The right of the 
strongest was the only footing on which the governments of the 
ancient and modern nations were in fact placed ; and the only 
effort of the theorists was, to disguise the simple and somewhat 
startling doctrine of the right of the strongest, by various mystical 
or popular fictions, which in no degree altered its real nature. Of 
these, the only two worthy to detain us, on the present occasion, 
are those of the two great English political parties, the whigs and 
the tories, as they are called, — by names not unlike, in dignity and 
significance, to the doctrines which are designated by them. The 
tories taught that the only foundation of government was " divine 
right;" and this is the same notion which is still inculcated on 
the continent of Europe, though the delicate ears of the age are 
flattered by the somewhat milder term, legitimacy. The whigs 
maintained that the foundation of government was an " original 
contract;" but of this contract the existing organization was the 
record and the evidence, and the obligation was perpetually bind- 
ing. It may deserve the passing remark, therefore, that in reality 
the doctrine of the whigs in England is a little less liberal than that 
of the tories. To say that the will of God is the warrant by which 
the king and his hereditary counsellors govern the land, is, to be 
sure, in a practical sense, what the illustrious sage of the revolu- 
tion, surviving in our neighborhood, dared, as early as 1765, to 
pronounce it — " dark ribaldry." But, in a merely speculative 
sense, it may without offence be said, that government, like every 
thing else, subsists by the divine will ; and in this acceptation, 
there is a certain elevation and unction in the sentiment. But to 
say, that the form of government is matter of original compact with 
the people, — that my ancestors, ages ago, agreed that they and 
their posterity, to the end of time, should give up to a certain line 
of princes the rule of the state, — that no right remains of revising 
this compact, — that nothing but extreme necessity (a necessity 
which it is treasonable even to attempt to define beforehand), jus- 
tifies a departure from this compact, in which no provision is made 
that the will of the majority should be done, but the contrary,— a 
doctrine like this, as it seems to me, while it is in substance as 
servile as the other, has the disadvantage of affecting a liberality 
not borne out by the truth. 

And now, fellow-citizens, I think I speak the words of truth and 
soberness, without color or exaggeration, when I say, that before 
the establishment of our American constitutions, this tory doctrine 



460 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



of the divine right was the most common, and this whig doctrine of 
the original contract was professedly the most liberal doctrine, ever 
maintained by any political party in any powerful state. I do not 
mean, that in some of the little Grecian republics, during their 
short-lived noon of liberty and glory, nothing better was practised, 
—nor that, in other times and places, speculative politicians had 
not, in their closets, dreamed of a better foundation of government. 
But 1 do mean, that, whereas the whigs in England are the party 
of politicians who have enjoyed, by general consent, the credit of 
inculcating a more liberal system, this precious notion of the com- 
pact is the extent to which their liberality went. 

It is plain, whichever of these solemn phrases — "divine right" 
or "original compact" — we may prefer to use, that the right of the 
strongest lies at the foundation of both, in the same w T ay and to the 
same degree. The doctrine of the divine right gives to the ruler 
authority to sustain himself against the people, not merely because 
resistance is unlawful, but because it is sacrilegious. The doctrine 
of the compact denounces every attempted change in the person 
of the prince as a breach of faith, and, as such, also not only 
treasonable but immoral! When a conflict ensues, force alone, of 
course, decides which party shall prevail ; and when force has so 
decided, all the sanctions of the divine will and of the social com- 
pact, revive in favor of the successful party. Even the statute 
legislation of England, although somewhat coy of unveiling the 
chaste mysteries of the common law, allows the successful usurper 
to claim the allegiance of the subject, in as full a manner as it 
could be done by a lawful sovereign. 

Nothing is wanting to fill up this sketch of other governments, 
but to consider what is the form in which force is exercised to sus- 
tain them ; and this is that of a standing army, — at this moment 
the chief support of every government on earth, except our own. 
As popular violence — the unrestrained and irresistible force of the 
mass of men, long oppressed and late awakened, and bursting in 
its wrath all barriers of law and humanity — is, unhappily, the 
usual instrument by which the intolerable abuses of a corrupt gov- 
ernment are removed, so the same blind force of the same fearful 
multitude, designedly kept in ignorance both of their duty and 
their privileges as citizens, employed in a form somew T hat different 
indeed, but far more dreadful — that of a mercenary standing army — 
is the instrument by which corrupt governments are sustained. The 
deplorable scenes which marked the earlier stages of the French 
revolution, have caKsd the attention of this age to the fearful effects 
of popular violence ; and the minds of men have recoiled at the 
dismay which leads the van, and the desolation which marks the 
progress, of an infuriated mob. But the powcof the mob is tran- 
sient. The rising sun most commonly s#at:*a*s :< >* **t&tpte*tfbj ranks : 



AT CAMBRIDGE, JULY 4, 1826. 



461 



the difficulty of subsistence drives its members asunder ; and it is 
only while it exists in mass that it is terrible. But there is a form 
in which the mob is indeed portentous, — when to its native terrors 
it adds the force of a frightful permanence, — when, by a regular 
organization, its strength is so curiously divided, and, by a strict 
discipline, its parts are so easily combined, that each and every 
portion of it carries in its presence the strength and terror of the 
whole, — and when, instead of that want of concert which renders 
the common mob incapable of arduous enterprises, it is despotically 
swayed by a single master-mind, and may be moved in array 
across the globe. 

1 remember to have seen the two kinds of mob brought into 
direct collision. I was present at the second great meeting of the 
populace of London, in 1819, in the midst of a crowd of 1 know 
not how many thousands, but assuredly a vast multitude, which 
was gathered together in Smithfield market. The universal dis- 
tress, as you recollect, was extreme. It was a short time after 
the scenes at Manchester, at which men's minds were ulcerated. 
Deaths by starvation were said not to be rare ; ruin by the stag- 
nation of business was general ; and some were already brooding 
over the dark project of assassinating the ministers, which was, not 
long after, matured by Thistlewood and his associates, — some of 
whom, on the day to which I allude, harangued this excited, despe- 
rate, starving assemblage. When I considered the state of feeling 
prevailing in the multitude around me, — when 1 looked in their 
lowering faces, heard their deep, indignant exclamations, reflected 
on the physical force concentrated (probably that of thirty or forty 
thousand able-bodied men), and added to all this, that they were 
assembled to exercise an undoubted privilege of British citizens, — 
I did suppose that any small number of troops, who should attempt 
to interrupt them, would be immolated on the spot. While I was 
musing on these things, and turning in my mind the common -places 
on the terrors of a mob, a trumpet was heard to sound an uncertain, 
but a harsh and clamorous, blast. I looked that the surrounding 
stalls should have furnished the unarmed multitude at least with 
that weapon, with which Virginias sacrificed his daughter to the 
liberty of Rome. I looked that the flying pavement should begin 
to darken the air. Another blast is heard ; a cry of " The horse- 
guards!" ran through the assembled thousands ; the orators on 
the platform were struck mute ; and the whole of that mighty 
host of starving, desperate men incontinently took to their heels ; 
in which, I must confess (feeling no vocation, in that cause, to be 
faithful found among the faithless), I did myself join them. We 
had run through the Old Bailey, and reached Ludgate hill, before 
we found out that we had been put to flight by a single mischiev- 
ous tool of power, who had come triumphing down the opposite 
street, on horseback, blowing a stage-coachman's horn I 



462 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



We have heard of those midnight scenes of desolation, when the 
populace of some overgrown capital, exhausted by the extremity 
of political oppression, or famishing at the gates of luxurious pal- 
aces, or kindled by some transport of fanatical zeal, rushes out to 
find the victims of its fury, — the lurid glare of torches, casting their 
gleams on faces dark with rage, — the ominous din of the alarm- 
bell, striking with affright on the broken visions of the sleepers, — 
the horrid yells, the thrilling screams, the multitudinous roar of the 
living storm, as it sweeps onward to its objects. But oh, the dis- 
ciplined, the paid, the honored mob ! — not moving in rags and 
starvation to some act of blood or plunder, but marching, in all the 
pomp and circumstance of war, to lay waste a feebler state, or 
cantoned at home among an overawed and broken-spirited people ! 
1 have read of granaries plundered, of castles sacked, and their 
inmates cruelly murdered, by the ruthless hands of the mob. I 
have read of friendly states ravaged, governments overturned, tyr 
annies founded and upheld, proscriptions executed, fruitful regions 
turned into trampled deserts, the tide of civilization thrown back, 
and a line of generations cursed, by a well-organized system of 
military force. 

Such was the foundation, in theory and in practice, of all the 
governments which can be considered as having had a permanent 
existence in the world before the revolution in this country. There 
are, certainly, shades of difference between the Oriental despotisms, 
ancient and modern, the military empire of Rome, the feudal sove- 
reignties of the middle ages, and the legitimate monarchies of the 
present day. Some were and are more, and some less, susceptible 
of melioration in practice ; and of all of them it might, perhaps, be 
said, — being all in essence bad, — 

"That which is best administered, is best." 

In no one of these governments, nor in any government, w T as the 
truth admitted, that the only just foundation of all government is 
the will of the people. If it ever occurred to the practical or the- 
oretical politician, that such an idea deserved examination, the 
experiment was thought to have been made in the republics of 
Greece, and to have failed, as fail it certainly did, from the phys- 
ical impossibility of conducting the business of the state by the 
actual intervention of every citizen. Such a plan of government 
must of course fail, if for no other reason, at least for this, that it 
would prevent the citizen from pursuing his own business, which 
it is the object of all government to enable him to do. It was 
considered then as settled, that the citizens, each and all, could not 
be the government ; some one or more must discharge its duties 
for them. Who shall do this ? — how shall they be designated ? 

The first king was a fortunate soldier, and the first nobleman 
w r as one of his generals. — and government has passed by descent 



AT CAMBRIDGE, JULY 4, 1826. 



463 



to their posterity, with no other interruption than has taken place 
when some new soldier of fortune has broken in upon this line 
of succession, in favor of himself and of his generals. The peo- 
ple have passed for nothing in the plan ; and whenever it has 
occurred to a busy genius to put the question, By what right gov- 
ernment is thus exercised and transmitted ; the common answer 
has been, By divine right ; while, in times of rare illumination, 
men have been consoled with the assurance, that such was the 
original contract. 

But a brighter day and a better dispensation were in reserve. 
The founders of the feudal system, barbarous, arbitrary and des- 
potic as they were, and profoundly ignorant of political science, 
were animated themselves with a spirit of personal liberty ; out of 
which, after ages of conflict, grew up a species of popular repre- 
sentation. In the eye of the feudal system, the king was the first 
baron, and, standing within his own sphere, each other baron was 
as good as the first. From this important relation, in which the 
feudal lords of England claimed to stand to their prince, arose the 
practice of their being consulted by him, in great and difficult con- 
junctures of affairs ; and hence the cooperation of a grand council 
(subsequently convened in two houses, under the name of parlia- 
ment), in making the laws and administering the government. The 
formation of this body has proved a great step in the progress of 
popular rights. Its influence has been decisive in breaking the 
charm of absolute monarchy, and giving to a body, partially eligible 
by the people, a share in the government. It has also operated 
most auspiciously on liberty, by exhibiting to the world, on the 
theatre of a conspicuous nation, a living example, that in propor- 
tion as the rights and interests of a people are represented in a 
government, in that degree the state becomes strong and prosper- 
ous. Thus far the science and the practice of government had 
gone in England, and here it had come to a stand. An equal rep- 
resentation, even in the house of commons, was unthought of, — or 
thought of only as one of the exploded abominations of Cromwell. 
It is asserted by Mr. Hume, writing about the middle of the last 
century, and weighing this subject with equal moderation and sa- 
gacity, that " the tide has run long and with some rapidity to the 
side of popular government, and is just beginning to turn toward 
monarchy." And he maintains that the British constitution is, 
though slowly, yet gradually verging toward an absolute govern- 
ment.* 

Such was the state of political science, when the independence 
of our country was declared, and its constitutions organized on the 
basis of that declaration. The precedents in favor of a popular 



* Hume's Essays, vol. 1. 



464 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



system were substantially these, — the short-lived prosperity of the 
republics of Greece, where each citizen took part in the conduct 
of affairs, and the admission into the British government of one 
branch of the legislature nominally elective, and operating, rather 
by opinion than power, as a partial check on the other branches. 
What lights these precedents gave them, our fathers had : beyond 
this, they owed every thing to their own wisdom and courage, in 
daring to carry out and apply to the executive branch of the gov- 
ernment that system of delegated power, of which the elements 
existed in their own provincial assemblies. They assumed, at 
once, not as a matter to be reached by argumentation, but as the 
dictate of unaided reason, — as an axiom too obvious to be discussed, 
though never in practice applied, — that where the state is too large 
to be governed by an actual assembly of all the citizens, the people 
shall elect those who will act for them, in making the laws and 
administering the government. They, therefore, laid the basis of 
their constitutions in a proportionate delegation of power from 
every part of the community ; and, regarding the declaration of 
our independence as the true era of our institutions, we are author- 
ized to assert, that from that era dates the establishment of the 
only perfect organization of government ; that of a representative 
republic, administered by persons freely chosen by the people. 

This plan of government is, therefore, in its theory, perfect ; 
and in its operation it is perfect also ; that is to say, no measure 
of policy, public or private, domestic or foreign, can long be pur- 
sued against the will of a majority of the people. Farther than 
this the wisdom of government cannot go. The majority of the 
people may err. Man, collectively as well as individually, is 
man still ; but whom can you more safely trust than the majority 
of the people ? — who is so likely to be right, always right, and 
altogether right, as the collective majority of a great nation, repre- 
sented in all its interests and pursuits, and in all its communities ? 

Thus has been solved the great problem in human affairs ; and 
a frame of government, perfect in its principles, has been brought 
down from the airy regions of Utopia, and has found "a local hab- 
itation and a name" in our country. Henceforward we have only 
to strive that the practical operation of our systems may be true to 
their spirit and theory. Henceforth it may be said of us — what 
never could have been said of any people, since the world began 
— be our sufferings what they will, no one can attribute them to 
our frame of government ; no one can point out a principle in 
our political systems, of which he has had reason to complain ; no 
one can sigh for a change in his country's institutions, as a boon to 
be desired for himself or for his children. There is not an appa- 
rent defect in our constitutions which could be removed without 
introducing a greater one ; nor a real evil, whose removal would 



AT CAMBRIDGE, JULY 4. 1826. 



465 



not be rather a nearer approach to the principles on which they 
are founded, than a departure from them. 

And what, fellow-citizens, are to be the fruits, to us and to the 
world, of the establishment of this perfect system of government? 
1 might partly answer the inquiry, by reminding you what have 
been the fruits to us and to the world ; by inviting you to compare 
our beloved country, as it is, in extent of settlement, in numbers 
and resources, in the useful and ornamental arts, in the abundance 
of the common blessings of life, in the general standard of charac- 
ter, in the means of education, in the institutions for social objects, 
in the various great industrious interests, in public strength and 
national respectability, with what it was, in all these respects, fifty 
years ago. But the limits of this occasion will not allow us to 
engage in such an enumeration ; and it will be amply sufficient 
for us to contemplate, in its principle, the beneficial operation on 
society of the form of government bequeathed to us by our fathers. 
This principle is, equality, — the equal enjoyment by every citizen 
of the rights and privileges of the social union. 

The principle of all other governments is monopoly, exclu- 
sion, favor. They secure great privileges to a small number, and 
necessarily at the expense of all the rest of the citizens. 

In the keen conflict of minds which preceded and accompanied 
the political convulsions of the last generation, the first principles 
of society were canvassed with a boldness and power before un- 
known in Europe ; and, from the great principle that all men are 
equal, it was, for the first time, triumphantly inferred, as a neces- 
sary consequence, that the will of a majority of the people is the 
rule of government. To meet these doctrines, so appalling in 
their tendency to the existing institutions of Europe, new ground 
was also taken by the champions of those institutions, and particu- 
larly by a man whose genius, eloquence, and integrity gave a 
currency, which nothing else could have given, to his splendid 
paradoxes. In one of his renowned productions,'* this great man, 
— for great, almost beyond rivalry, even in his errors, most assur- 
edly he was, — in order to meet the inference, drawn from the 
equality of man, that the will of the majority must be the rule of 
government, has undertaken, as he says, " to fix, with some de- 
gree of distinctness, an idea of what it is we mean when we say 
the people;" and in fulfilment of this design, he lays it down, 
that, in a state of rude nature, there is no such thing as a people. 
A number of men, in themselves, can have no collective capacity. 
The idea of a people is the idea of a corporation : it is wholly 
artificial, and made, like all other legal fictions, by common agree- 
ment." 

*The Appeal from the New to the Old Whigs. 

Nnn 



466 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



" In a state of rude nature there is no such thing as a people " ! 
I would fain learn in what corner of the earth, rude or civilized, 
men are to be found who are not a people, more or less improved. 
" A number of men, in themselves, have no collective capacity " ! 
I would gladly be told where, in what region, I will not say of 
geography — I know there is none such — but of poetry or romance, 
a number of men has been placed by nature, each standing alone, 
and not bound by any of those ties of blood, affinity and language, 
which form the rudiments of a collective capacity. " The idea of 
a people is the idea of a corporation : it is wholly artificial, and 
made, like all other legal fictions, by common agreement " ! In- 
deed ! is the social principle artificial ? Is the gift of articulate 
speech, which enables man to impart his condition to man, — the 
organized sense, which enables him to comprehend what is impart- 
ed ; is that sympathy, which subjects our opinions and feelings, 
and, through them, our conduct, to the influence of others, and 
their conduct to our influence ; is that chain of cause and effect, 
which makes our characters receive impressions from the gene- 
rations before us, and puts it in our power, by a good or bad 
precedent, to distil a poison or a balm into the characters of pos- 
terity ; — are these, indeed, all by-laws of a corporation ? Are all 
the feelings of ancestry, posterity, and fellow-citizenship, — all the 
charm, veneration, and love, bound up in the name of country, — 
the delight, the enthusiasm, with which we seek out, after the 
lapse of generations and ages, the traces of our fathers' bravery or 
wisdom, — are these all "a legal fiction"? Is it, indeed, a legal 
fiction, that moistens the eye of the solitary traveller, when he 
meets a countryman in a foreign land ? Is it a " common agree- 
ment " that gives its meaning to my mother tongue, and enables 
me to speak to the hearts of my kindred men, beyond the rivers 
and beyond the mountains ? Yes, it is a common agreement, 
recorded on the same registry with that which marshals the winged 
nations, that, 

" In common, ranged in figure, wedge their way, 
Intelligent of seasons ; and set forth 
Their airy caravan, high over seas 
Flying, and over lands, with mutual wing 
Easing their flight." 

The mutual dependence of man on man, family on family, inter- 
est on interest, is but a chapter in the great law, not of corporations, 
but of nature. The law by which commerce, manufactures and 
agriculture support each other, is the same law, in virtue of which 
the thirsty earth owes its fertility to the rivers and the rains, — and 
the clouds derive their high-travelling waters from the rising vapors, 
— and the ocean is fed from the secret springs of the mountains, — 



AT CAMBRIDGE, JULY 4, 1826. 



467 



and the plant that grows derives its increase from the plant that 
decays, — and all subsist and thrive, not by themselves, but by 
others, in the great political economy of nature. The necessary 
cohesion of the parts of the political system is no more artificial 
than the gravity of the natural system, in which planet is bound to 
planet, and all to the sun, and the sun to all. Commencing with 
that principle in the constitution of our race from which the fami- 
ly relations spring, and proceeding through the various forms of 
human society, up to the most nicely-balanced government, we 
may assert a foundation in nature for them all. Till I see the 
solitary man created by a miracle ; or the anchorite in his cell, or 
the shipwrecked adventurer on his desert island, reaching the 
full development of all the intellectual and moral powers of our 
nature, I must think, that the mutual dependence on each other 
of the members of the body politic is as essential to the nature of 
man, as the gravitation of the heavenly bodies is to the natural 
system of the universe. And yet the great national compact — the 
political, intellectual, moral system — is artificial, is a legal fiction ! 
"O that mine enemy had said it!" the admirers of Mr. Burke 
may well exclaim. O that some impious Voltaire, some ruthless 
Rousseau, had uttered it ! Had uttered it ? — Rousseau did utter 
the same thing ; and more rebuked than any other error of this 
misguided genius, is his doctrine of the social contract, of which 
Burke has reasserted, and more than reasserted, the principle, in 
the sentences I have quoted. 

But no, fellow-citizens, — political society exists by the law of 
nature. Man is formed for it : every man is formed for it : every 
man has an equal right to its privileges, — and to be deprived of 
them, under whatever pretence, is so far to be reduced to slavery. 
The authors of the Declaration of Independence saw this, and taught 
that all men are born free and equal. On this principle our con- 
stitutions rest ; and no constitution can bind a people on any other 
principle. No original contract, that gives away this right, can bind 
any but the parties to it. My forefathers could not, if they had 
wished, have stipulated to their king that his children should rule 
over their children. By the introduction of this principle of equal- 
ity it is, that the declaration of independence has at once effected 
a before unimagined extension of social privileges. Grant that no 
new blessing (which, however, can by no means with truth be 
granted) be introduced into the world on this plan of equality, — 
still it will have discharged the inestimable office of communicating, 
in equal proportion, to all the citizens, those privileges of the social 
union which were before partitioned, in an invidious gradation, pro- 
fusely among the privileged orders, and parsimoniously among all 
the rest. Let me instance in the right of suffrage. The enjoy- 
ment of this right enters largely into the happiness of the social 



468 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



condition. I do not mean that it is necessary to our happiness 
actually to exercise this right at every election ; but I say, the 
right itself to give our voice in the choice of public servants and 
the management of public affairs is so precious, so inestimable, 
that there is not a citizen who hears me that would not lay down 
his life to assert it. This is a right unknown in every country 
but ours. I say unknown, because in England, whose institutions 
make the nearest approach to a popular character, the elective 
suffrage is not only incredibly unequal and capricious in its distri- 
bution, but extends, after all, only to the choice of a minority of 
one house of the legislature. Thus, then, the people of this 
country are, by their constitutions of government, endowed with a 
new source of enjoyment, elsewhere almost unknown — a great 
and substantial happiness — an unalloyed happiness. Most of the 
desirable things of life bear a high price in the world's market. 
Every thing usually deemed a great good must, for its attainment, 
be weighed down, in the opposite scale, with what is as usually 
deemed a great evil — labor, care, danger. It is only the unbought, 
spontaneous, essential circumstances of our nature and condition, 
that yield a liberal enjoyment. Our religious hopes, intellectual 
meditations, social sentiments, family affections, political privileges, 
— these are springs of unpurchased happiness ; and to condemn 
men to live under an arbitrary government, is to cut them off from 
nearly all the satisfactions which nature designed should flow from 
those principles within us, by which a tribe of kindred men is 
constituted a people. 

But it is not merely an extension to all the members of society 
of those blessings which, under other systems, are monopolized by 
a few. Great and positive improvements, I feel sure, are destined 
to flow from the introduction of the republican system. The first 
of these will be, to make wars less frequent, and finally to cause 
them to cease altogether. It was not a republican — it w T as the 
subject of a monarchy, and no patron of novelties — who said, 

" War is a game, which, were their subjects wise, 
Kings would not play at." 

A great majority of the wars which have desolated mankind, 
have grown either out of the disputed titles and rival claims of 
sovereigns, or their personal character, particularly their ambition, 
or the character of their favorites, or some other circumstance evi- 
dently incident to a form of government which withholds from the 
people the ultimate control of affairs. And the more civilized men 
grow, strange as it may seem, the more universally is this the case, 
tn the barbarous ages, the people pursued war as an occupation. 
Its plunder was more profitable than their labor at home, in the 
state of general insecurity. In modern times, princes raise their 



AT CAMBRIDGE, JULY 4, 1826. 



469 



soldiers by conscription, their sailors by impressment, and drive 
them, at the point of the bayonet and dirk, into the battles they 
fight for reasons of state. But in a republic, where the people, 
by their representatives, must vote the declaration of war, and 
afterwards raise the means of its support, none but wars of just and 
necessary defence can be waged. Republics, we are told, indeed, 
are ambitious, — a seemingly wise remark, devoid of meaning. Man 
is ambitious ; and the question is, Where will his ambition be most 
likely to drive his country into war — in a monarchy, where he has 
but to "cry havoc, and let slip the dogs of war," or in a republic, 
where he must get the vote of a strong majority of the nation ? 
Let history furnish the answer. The book which promised you. 
in its title, a picture of the progress of the human family, turns out 
to be a record, not of the human family, but of the Macedonian 
family, the Julian family, the families of York and Lancaster, of 
Lorraine and Bourbon. We need not go to the ancient annals to 
confirm this remark. We need not speak of those who reduced 
Asia and Africa, in the morning of the world, to a vassalage from 
which they have never recovered. We need not dwell on the 
more notorious exploits of the Alexanders and the Caesars, — the 
men who wept for other worlds to visit with the pestilence of their 
arms. We need not run down the bloody line of the dark ages, 
when the barbarous north disgorged her ambitious savages on 
Europe, or when, at a later period, barbarous Europe poured back 
her holy ruffians on Asia. We need but look at the dates of 
modern history, — the history of civilized, balanced Europe. We 
here behold the ambition of Charles V. involving the continent of 
Europe in war for the first half of the sixteenth century, and the 
fiendlike malignity of Catharine de Medici and her kindred dis- 
tracting it the other half. We see the haughty and cheerless 
bigotry of Philip persevering in a conflict of extermination, for one 
whole age, in the Netherlands, and darkening the English channel 
with his armada ; while France prolongs her civil dissensions, 
because Henry IV. was the twenty-second cousin of Henry III. 
We enter the seventeenth century, and again find the hereditary 
pride and bigotry of the house of Austria wasting Germany and 
the neighboring powers with the Thirty Years' war ; and before 
the peace of Westphalia is concluded, England is plunged into the 
fiery trial of her militant liberties. Contemporaneously, the civil 
wars are revived in France, and the kingdom is blighted by the 
passions of Mazarin. The civil wars are healed, and the atrocious 
career of Louis XIV. begins, — a half-century of bloodshed and 
woe, that stands in revolting contrast with the paltry pretences of 
his wars. At length the peace of Ryswic is made, in 1697, and 
bleeding Europe throws off the harness and lies down, like an ex- 
hausted giant, to repose. In three years, the testament of a doting 
40 



470 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



Spanish king gives the signal for the Succession war, till a cup of 
tea, spilt on Mrs. Masham's apron, restores peace to the afflicted 
kingdoms. Meantime the madman of the north had broken loose 
upon the world, and was running his frantic round. Peace, at 
length, is restored, and, with one or two short wars, it remains 
unbroken till, in 1740, the will of Charles VI. occasions another 
testamentary contest, — and, in the gallant words of the stern but 
relenting moralist, 

" The queen, the beauty, sets the world in anus." 

Eight years are this time sufficient to exhaust the combatants, and 
the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle is concluded : but, in 1755, the old 
French war is kindled in our own wilderness, and, through the 
united operation of the monopolizing spirit of England, the party 
intrigues of France, and the ambition of Frederic, spread through- 
out Europe. The wars of the last generation I need not name, 
nor dwell on that signal retribution by which the political ambition 
of the cabinets at length conjured up the military ambition of the 
astonishing individual, who seems, in our day, to have risen out of 
the ranks of the people to chastise the privileged orders with that 
iron scourge with which they had so long afflicted mankind, — to 
gather, with his strong plebeian hands, the fragrance of those 
palmy honors which they had reared, for three centuries, in the 
bloody gardens of their royalty. It may well be doubted whether, 
under a government like ours, one of all these contests would have 
taken place. Those that arose from disputed titles and bequests 
of thrones, could not, of course, have existed ; and, making every 
allowance for the effect of popular delusion, it seems to me not 
possible that a representative government would have embarked 
in any of the wars of ambition and aggrandizement which fill up 
the catalogue. 

Who, then, are these families and individuals — these royal lamsta, 
— by whom the nations are kept in training for a long gladiatorial 
combat ? Are they better, wiser, than we ? Look at them in 
life, — what are they ? "Kings are fond," says Mr. Burke (no 
scoffer at thrones), "kings are fond of low company."* What 
are they when gone ? Expende Hannibalem. Enter the great 
cathedrals of Europe, and contemplate the sepulchres of the men 
who claimed to be the lords of each successive generation. Ques- 
tion your own feelings as you behold where the Plantagenets and 
Tudors, the Stuarts and those of Brunswick, lie mournfully huddled 
up in the chapels of Westminster abbey, and compare those feel- 
ings with the homage you pay to Heaven's aristocracy, — the untitled 
learning, genius and wit that moulder by their side. Count over 

* Speech on Economical Reform. 



AT CAMBRIDGE, JULY 4, 1826. 



471 



the sixty-six emperors and princes of the Austrian house, that lie 
gathered in the dreary pomp of monumental marble, in the vaults 
of the Capuchins at Vienna ; and weigh the worth of their dust 
against the calamities of their Peasants' war, their Thirty Years' 
war, their Succession war, their wars to enforce the Pragmatic 
Sanction, and of all the other uncouth pretences for destroying 
mankind, with which they have plagued the world. 

But the cessation of wars, to which we look forward as the re- 
sult of the gradual diffusion of republican government, is but the 
commencement of the social improvements, which cannot but flow 
from the same benignant source. It has been justly said that he 
was a great benefactor of mankind, who could make two blades of 
grass grow where one grew before. But our fathers, our fathers 
were the benefactors of mankind, who brought into action such a 
vast increase of physical, political, and moral energy ; who have 
made not two citizens to live only, but hundreds, yea, unnumbered 
thousands to live, and to prosper in regions, which, but for their 
achievements, would have remained for ages unsettled, — and to en- 
joy those rights of men, which, but for their institutions, would 
have continued to be arrogated, as the exclusive inheritance of a 
few. I appeal to the fact. I ask any sober judge of political 
probability to tell me, whether more has not been done to extend 
the domain of civilization, in fifty years, since the declaration of 
independence, than would have been done in five centuries of con- 
tinued colonial subjection. It is not even a matter of probability ; 
the king in council had adopted it, as a maxim of his American 
policy, that no settlements in this country should be made be- 
yond the Alleghanies ; — that the design of Providence in spread- 
ing out the fertile valley of the Mississippi should not be fulfilled. 

I know that it is said, in palliation of the restrictive influence of 
European governments, that they are as good as their subjects can 
bear. I know it is said, that it would be useless and pernicious to 
call on the half-savage and brutified peasantry of many countries, 
to take a share in the administration of affairs, by electing or being 
elected to office. I know they are unfit for it ; it is the very curse 
of the system. What is it that unfits them ? What is it that 
makes slavish labor, and slavish ignorance, and slavish stupidity, 
their necessary heritage ? Are they not made of the same Cau- 
casian clay? Have they not five senses, the same faculties, the 
same passions ? And is it any thing but an aggravation of the vice 
of arbitrary governments, that they first deprive men of their rights, 
and then unfit them to exercise those rights, — profanely construing 
the effect into a justification of the evil ? 

The influence of our institutions on foreign nations is — next to 
their effect on our own condition — the most interesting question 
we can contemplate. With our example of popular government 



472 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION 



before their eyes, the nations of the earth will not eventually be 
satisfied with any other. With the French revolution as a beacon 
to guide them, they will learn, we may hope, not to embark too 
rashly on the mounting waves of reform. The cause, however 
of popular government is rapidly gaining in the world. In Eng- 
land, education is carrying it wide and deep into society. On the 
continent, written constitutions of governments, nominally repre- 
sentative, — though as yet, it must be owned, nominally so alone, — 
are adopted in eight or ten late absolute monarchies ; and it is n©t 
without good grounds that we may trust, that the indifference with 
which the Christian powers contemplate the sacrifice of Greece, 
and their crusade against the constitutions of Spain, Piedmont, and 
Naples, will satisfy the mass of thinking men in Europe, that it is 
time to put an end to these cruel delusions, and take their own 
government into their own hands. 

But the great triumphs of constitutional freedom, to which our 
independence has furnished the example, have been witnessed in 
the southern portion of our hemisphere. Sunk to the last point 
of colonial degradation, they have risen at once into the organization 
of free republics. Their struggle has been arduous ; and eighteen 
years of checkered fortune have not yet brought it to a close. 
But we must not infer, from their prolonged agitation, that their 
independence is uncertain ; that they have prematurely put on the 
toga virilis of Freedom. They have not begun too soon ; they 
have more to do. Our war of independence was shorter; — -hap- 
pily we were contending with a government, that could not, like 
that of Spain, pursue an interminable and hopeless contest, in de- 
fiance of the people's will. Our transition to a mature and well- 
adjusted constitution was more prompt than that of our sister re- 
publics ; for the foundations had long been settled, the preparation 
long made. And when we consider that it is our example, which 
has aroused the spirit of independence from California to Cape 
"*Horn ; that the experiment of liberty, if it had failed with us, most 
surely would not have been attempted by them ; that even now 
our counsels and acts will operate as powerful precedents in this 
great family of republics — we learn the importance of the post 
which Providence has assigned us in the world. A wise and har- 
monious administration of the public affairs, — a faithful, liberal and 
patriotic exercise of the private duties of the citizen, — while they 
secure our happiness at home, will diffuse a healthful influence 
through the channels of national communication, and serve the 
cause of liberty beyond the equator and the Andes. When we 
show a united, conciliatory, and imposing front to their rising 
states, we show them, better than sounding eulogies can do, the 
true aspect of an independent republic. We give them a living 
example, that the fireside policy of a people is like that of the 



AT CAMBRIDGE, JULY 4, .826. 



473 



Individual man. As the one, commencing in the prudence, order 
and industry of the private circle, extends itself to all the duties 
of social life, of the family, the neighborhood, the country ; so the 
true domestic policy of the republic, beginning in the wise organ- 
ization of its own institutions, pervades its territories with a vigilant, 
prudent, temperate administration ; and extends the hand of cor- 
dial interest to all the friendly nations, especially to those which 
are of the household of liberty. 

It is in this way that we are to fulfil our destiny in the world. 
The greatest engine of moral power, which human nature knows, 
is an organized, prosperous state. All that man, in his individual 
capacity, can do — all that he can effect by his fraternities — by his 
ingenious discoveries and wonders of art — or by his influence over 
others — is as nothing, compared with the collective, perpetuated in- 
fluence on human affairs and human happiness of a well-constituted, 
powerful commonwealth. It blesses generations with its sweet in- 
fluence ; — even the barren earth seems to pour out its fruits under 
a system where property is secure, while her fairest gardens are 
blighted by despotism ; — men, thinking, reasoning men, abound 
beneath its benignant sway, — nature enters into a beautiful accord, 
a better, purer asiento with man, and guides an industrious citizen 
to every rood of her smiling wastes ; — and we see, at length, that 
what has been called a state of nature, has been most falsely, ca- 
lumniously so denominated ; that the nature of man is neither that 
of a savage, a hermit, nor a slave ; but that of a member of a 
well-ordered family, that of a good neighbor, a free citizen, a well- 
informed, good man, acting with others like him. This is the les- 
son which is taught in the charter of our independence ; this is the 
lesson which our example is to teach the world. 

The great epic poet of Rome, the subject of an absolute prince, 
in unfolding the duties and destinies of his countrymen, who had 
but lately grasped the sceptre of universal dominion, bids them 
look with disdain on the polished and intellectual arts of Greece 
and deem their arts to be, 

To rule the nations with imperial sway, 

To spare the tribes that yield, fight down the proud, 

And force the mood of peace upon the world. 

The event corresponded but too faithfully with the spirit of this 
inauspicious counsel, in which ambition and the lust of power are 
thinly disguised, under the semblance of a compulsory pacification. 
Rome, corrupted and corrupting, fell unlamented. Let the na- 
tional career of America be conceived and pursued, under the 
united influence of the spirit of civilization and Christianity. Let 
us cultivate those humanizing and liberal 'arts, — the precious lega- 
cy of the bright age of Greece, — and let us learn to find the true 
40 * O o o 



474 



MR. EVERETT'S ORATION, &c. 



objects of national pride, not in military achievement and extended 
conquest, but in the intelligent pursuit of the great interests of 
social man ; in the cultivation of the soil ; in the various branches 
of productive industry ; in peaceful victories over the obstacles 
which physical nature throws in the progress of the human mind, 
toward the utmost development of its powers. Let us see 
whether the murderous recourse to bloodshed which has hitherto 
disgraced the nations of Christendom, cannot be dispensed with, 
without sacrificing the public interest or honor; whether some- 
thing effectual cannot be done to alleviate the painful inequalities 
of human fortune ; and whether philosophy cannot be led from the 
closet, and religion from the altar, and made to exert a united, a 
practical, and an all-powerful influence on the affairs of men. 



A DISCOURSE, 



IN COMMEMORATION OF THE LIVES AND SERVICES OF 

JOHN ADAMS AND THOMAS JEFFERSON, 

DELIVERED IN FANEUIL HALL, BOSTON, AUG. 2, 1826. 

BY DANIEL WEBSTER. 



This is an unaccustomed spectacle. For the first time, fellow- 
citizens, badges of mourning shroud the columns and overhang the 
arches of this hall. These walls, which were consecrated, so 
long ago, to the cause of American liberty, which witnessed her 
infant struo-ojes, and runs; with the shouts of her earliest victories, 
proclaim, now, that distinguished friends and champions of the great 
cause have fallen. It is right that it should be thus. The tears 
which flow, and the honors that are paid, when the founders of 
the republic die, give hope that the republic itself may be im- 
mortal. It is fit, that by public assembly and solemn observance, 
by anthem and by eulogy, we commemorate the services of na- 
tional benefactors, extol their virtues, and render thanks to God 
for eminent blessings, early given and long continued, to our fa- 
vored country. 

Adams and Jefferson are no more ; and we are assembled, fel- 
low-citizens, the aged, the middle-aged, and the young, by the 
spontaneous impulse of all, under the authority of the municipal 
government, with the presence of the chief magistrate of the 
commonwealth, and others its official representatives, the univer- 
sity, and the learned societies, to bear our part, in those manifesta- 
tions of respect and gratitude which universally pervade the land. 
Adams and Jefferson are no more. On our fiftieth anniversary, 
the great day of national jubilee, in the very hour of public 
rejoicing, in the midst of echoing and reechoing voices of thanks- 
giving, while their own names were on all tongues, they took their 
flight, together, to the world of spirits. 

If it be true that no one can safely be pronounced happy while 
he lives ; if that event which terminates life can alone crown its 
honors and its glory, — what felicity is here ! The great Epic of 



476 



MR. WEBSTER'S EULOGY ON 



their lives, how happily concluded! Poetry itself has hara in- 
closed illustrious lives, and finished the career of earthly renown, 
by such a consummation. If we had the power, we could not wish 
to reverse this dispensation of the Divine Providence. The great 
objects of life were accomplished ; the drama was ready to be closed : 
it has closed ; our patriots have fallen ; but so fallen, at such age, 
with such coincidence, on such a day, that we cannot rationally la- 
ment that that end has come, which we knew could not be long 
deferred. 

Neither of these great men, fellow-citizens, could have died at 
any time, without leaving an immense void in our American soci- 
ety. They have been so intimately, and for so long a time, blend- 
ed with the history of the country, and especially so united, in our 
thoughts and recollections, with the events of the revolution, that 
the death of either would have touched the strings of public sym- 
pathy. We should have felt that one great link, connecting us 
with former times, was broken ; that we had lost something more, 
as it were, of the presence of the revolution itself, and of the act 
of independence, and were driven on by another great remove, 
from the days of our country's early distinction, to meet posterity, 
and to mix with the future. Like the mariner, whom the ocean and 
the winds carry along, till he sees the stars which have directed 
his course, and lighted his pathless w T ay, descend one by one, be- 
neath the rising horizon, we should have felt that the stream of time 
had borne us onward, till another great luminary, whose light had 
cheered us, and whose guidance we had followed, had sunk away 
from our sight. 

But the concurrence of their death, on the anniversary of inde- 
pendence, has naturally awakened stronger emotions. Both had 
been presidents ; both had lived to great age ; both were early pat- 
riots ; and both were distinguished and ever honored by their imme- 
diate agency in the act of independence. It cannot but seem 
striking and extraordinary, that these two should live to see the 
fiftieth year from the date of that act; that they should complete 
that year; and that then, on the day which had fast linked forev- 
er their own fame with their country's glory, the heavens should 
open to receive them both at once. As their lives themselves 
were the gifts of Providence, who is not willing to recognize in 
their happy termination, as well as in their long continuance, 
proofs that our country, and its benefactors, are objects of His 
care ? 

Adams and Jefferson, I have said, are no more. As human 
oemgs, indeed, they are no more. They are no more, as in 1776, 
bold and fearless advocates of independence; no more, as on sub- 
sequent periods, the head of the government ; no more, as we have 
recently seen them, aged and venerable objects of admiration and 
v egard. They are no more. They are dead. But how little is 



ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. 



477 



there of the great and good, which can die ! To their country they 
yet live, and live forever. They live in all that perpetuates the re- 
membrance of men on earth ; in the recorded proofs of their own 
great actions, in the offspring of their intellect, in the deep engraved 
lines of public gratitude, and in the respect and homage of mankind. 
They live in then example ; and they live, emphatically, and will 
live in the influence which their lives and efforts, their principles 
and opinions, now exercise, and will continue to exercise, on the 
affairs of men, not only in their own country, but throughout the 
civilized world. A superior and commanding human intellect, a 
truly great man, when Heaven vouchsafes so rare a gift, is not a 
temporary flame, burning bright for a while, and then expiring, 
giving place to returning darkness. It is rather a spark of fervent 
heat, as well as radiant light, with power to enkindle the common 
mass of human mind ; so that when it glimmers, in its own decay, 
and finally goes out in death, no night follows, but it leaves the 
world all light, all on fire, from the potent contact of its own 
spirit. Bacon died ; but the human understanding, roused by the 
touch of his miraculous wand, to a perception of the true philoso- 
phy, and the just mode of inquiring after truth, has kept on its 
course, successfully and gloriously. Newton died ; yet the 
courses of the spheres are still known, and they yet move on, in 
the orbits which he saw, and described for them, in the infinity of 
space. 

No two men now live, fellow-citizens, — perhaps it may be 
doubted, whether any two men have ever lived in one age, — who, 
more than those we now commemorate, have impressed then own 
sentiments, in regard to politics and government, on mankind, in- 
fused their own opinions more deeply into the opinions of others, 
or given a more lasting direction to the current of human thought. 
Their work doth not perish with them. The tree which they as- 
sisted to plant, will flourish, although they water it and protect it 
no longer ; for it has struck its roots deep ; it has sent them to the 
very centre ; no storm, not of force to burst the orb, can overturn 
it ; its branches spread wide ; they stretch their protecting arms 
broader and broader, and its top is destined to reach the heavens. 
We are not deceived. There is no delusion here. No age will 
come, in which the American revolution will appear less than it 
is, one of the greatest events in human history. No age will 
come, in which it will cease to be seen and felt, on either conti- 
nent, that a mighty step, a great advance, not only in American 
affairs, but in human affairs, was made on the 4th of July, 1776. 
And no age will come, we trust, so ignorant or so unjust, as not to 
see and acknowledge the efficient agency of these we now honor, 
in producing that momentous event. 

We are not assembled, therefore, fellow-citizens, as inen over- 



478 



MR. WEBSTER'S EULOGY ON 



whelmed with calamity by the sudden disruption of the ties of 
friendship or affection, or as in despair for the republic, by the un- 
timely blighting of its hopes. Death has not surprised us by an 
unseasonable blow. We have, indeed, seen the tomb close, but 
it has closed only over mature years, over long-protracted public 
service, over the weakness of age, and over life itself only when 
the ends of living had been fulfilled. These suns, as they rose slow- 
ly, and steadily, amidst clouds and storms, in their ascendant, so 
they have not rushed from their meridian to sink suddenly in the 
west. Like the mildness, the serenity, the continuing benignity 
of a summer's day, they have gone down with slow-descending, 
grateful, long-lingering light ; and now that they are beyond the 
visible margin of the world, good omens cheer us from " the bright 
track of their fiery car ! " 

There were many points of similarity in the lives and fortunes 
of these great men. They belonged to the same profession, and 
had pursued its studies and its practice, for unequal lengths of 
time indeed, but with diligence and effect. Both were learned 
and able lawyers. They were natives and inhabitants, respective- 
ly, of those two of the colonies, which, at the revolution, were 
the largest and most powerful, and which naturally had a lead in 
the political affairs of the times. When the colonies became, in 
some degree, united, by the assembling of a general congress, they 
were brought to act together, in its deliberations, not indeed at the 
same time, but both at early periods. Each had already manifest- 
ed his attachment to the cause of the country, as well as his abil- 
ity to maintain it by printed addresses, public speeches, extensive 
correspondence, and whatever other mode could be adopted, for 
the purpose of exposing the encroachments of the British parlia- 
ment and animating the people to a manly resistance. Both were 
not only decided, but early friends of independence. While oth- 
ers yet doubted, they were resolved ; while others hesitated, they 
pressed forward. They were both members of the committee for 
preparing the Declaration of Independence, and they constituted 
the sub-committee, appointed by the other members to make the 
draught. They left their seats in congress, being called to other 
public employments, at periods not remote from each other, al- 
though one of them returned to it, afterwards, for a short time. 
Neither of them was of the assembly of great men which formed 
the present constitution, and neither was at any time member of 
congress under its provisions. Both have been public ministers 
abroad, both vice-presidents, and both presidents. These coinci- 
dences are now singularly crowned and completed. They have 
•lied together ; and they died on the anniversary of liberty. 

When many of us were last in this place, fellow-citizens, it was 
on the day of that anniversary. We were met to enjoy the f» s- 



ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. 



479 



tivities belonging to the occasion, and to manifest our grateful hom- 
age to our political fathers. 

We did not, we could not here, forget our venerable neighbor 
of Quincy. We knew that we were standing, at a time of high 
and palmy prosperity, where he had stood in the hour of utmost 
peril ; that we saw nothing but liberty and security, where he had 
met the frown of power ; that we were enjoying every thing, where 
he had hazarded every thing ; and just and sincere plaudits rose to 
his name, from the crowds which rilled this area, and hung over 
these galleries. He whose grateful duty it was to speak to us, on 
that day, of the virtues of our fathers, had, indeed, admonished us 
that time and years were about to level his venerable frame with 
the dust. But he bade us hope, that the " sound of a nation's joy, 
rushing from our cities, ringing from our valleys, echoing from our 
hills, might yet break the silence of his aged ear ; that the rising 
blessings of grateful millions might yet visit, with glad light, his de- 
caying vision." Alas ! that vision was then closing forever. Alas ! 
the silence which was then settling on that aged ear; was an ever- 
lasting silence ! For, lo ! in the very moment of our festivities, 
his freed spirit ascended to God who gave it ! Human aid and 
human solace terminate at the grave ; or we would gladly have 
borne him upward, on a nation's outspread hands ; we would 
have accompanied him, and, with the blessings of millions and the 
prayers of millions, commended him to the divine favor.* 

While still indulging our thoughts on the coincidence of the 
death of this venerable man with the anniversary of independence, 
we learn that Jefferson, too, has fallen ; and that these aged patri- 
ots, these illustrious fellow-laborers, had left our world together. 
May not such events raise the suggestion that they are not unde- 
signed, and that Heaven does so order things as sometimes to at- 
tract strongly the attention, and excite the thoughts of men ? The 
occurrence has added new interest to our anniversary, and will be 
remembered in all time to come. 

The occasion, fellow-citizens, requires some account of the 
lives and services of John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. This 
duty must necessarily be performed with great brevity ; and, in the 
discharge of it, I shall be obliged to confine myself, principally, to 
those parts of their history and character which belonged to them 
as public men. 

John Adams was born at Qumcy, then part of the ancient 
town of Braintree, on the 19th day of October (old style), 1735. 
He Avas a descendant of the Puritans, his ancestors having early 
emigrated from England, and settled in Massachusetts. Discover 
ing early a strong love of reading and of knowledge, together 
with marks of great strength and activity of mind, proper care 
was taken by his worthy father, to provide for his education. He 



480 



MR. WEBSTER'S EULOGY ON 



pursued his youthful studies in Braintree, under Mr. Marsh, a 
teacher whose fortune it was that Josiah Quincy, Jr. as well as 
the subject of these remarks, should receive from him his instruc- 
tion in the rudiments of classical literature. Having been admit- 
ted, in 1751, a member of Harvard college, Mr. Adams was 
graduated, in course, in 1755 ; and on the catalogue of that insti- 
tution, his name, at the time of his death, was second among the 
living alumni, being preceded only by that of the venerable Hol- 
yoke. With what degree of reputation he left the university, is 
not now precisely known. We know only that he was distin- 
guished, in a class which numbered Locke and Hemenway among 
its members. Choosing the law for his profession, he commenced 
and prosecuted his studies at Worcester, under the direction of 
Samuel Putnam, a gentleman whom he has himself described as 
an acute man, an able and learned lawyer, and as in large profes- 
sional practice at that time. In 1758, he was admitted to the bar, 
and commenced business in Braintree. He is understood to have 
made his first considerable effort, or to have obtained his first sig- 
nal success, at Plymouth, on one of those occasions which furnish 
the earliest opportunity for distinction to many young men of the 
profession, a jury trial, and a criminal cause. His business natu- 
rally grew with his reputation, and his residence in the vicinity af- 
forded the opportunity, as his growing eminence gave the power, 
of entering on the larger field of practice which the capital pre- 
sented. In 1766, he removed his residence to Boston, still con- 
tinuing his attendance on the neighboring circuits, and not unfre- 
quently called to remote parts of the province. In 1770, his 
professional firmness was brought to a test of some severity, on 
the application of the British officers and soldiers to undertake 
their defence, on the trial of the indictments found against them 
on account of the transactions of the memorable 5th of March. 
He seems to have thought, on this occasion, that a man can no 
more abandon the proper duties of his profession, than he can 
abandon other duties. The event proved, that as he judged well 
for his own reputation, so he judged well, also, for the interest 
and permanent fame of his country. The result of that trial 
proved, that notwithstanding the high degree of excitement then 
existing, in consequence of the measures of the British govern- 
ment, a jury of Massachusetts would not deprive the most reck- 
less enemies, even the officers of that standing army, quartered 
among them, which they so perfectly abhorred, of any part of 
that protection which the law, in its mildest and most indulgent 
interpretation, afforded to persons accused of crimes. 

Without pursuing Mr. Adams's professional course further, suf- 
fice it to .say, that on the first establishment of the judicial tribu- 
nals under the authority of the state, in 1776, he received an offei 



ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. 



of the high and responsible station of chief justice of the Su- 
preme Court. But he was destined for another and a different 
career. From early life the bent of his mind was toward poli- 
tics ; a propensity, which the state of the times, if it did not cre- 
ate, doubtless very much strengthened. Public subjects must 
have occupied the thoughts and filled up the conversation in the 
circles in which he then moved ; and the interesting questions, at 
that time just arising, could not but seize on a mind, like his, ar- 
dent, sanguine and patriotic. The letter, fortunately preserved, 
written by him at Worcester so early as the 12th of October, 1755, 
is a proof of very comprehensive views, and uncommon depth of 
reflection, in a young man not yet quite twenty. In this letter he 
predicted the transfer of power, and the establishment of a new 
seat of empire in America: he predicted, also, the increase of 
population in the colonies ; and anticipated their naval distinction, 
and foretold that all Europe, combined, could not subdue them. 
All this is said, not on a public occasion, or for effect, but in the 
style of sober and friendly correspondence, as the result of his 
own thoughts. " I sometimes retire," said he, at the close of the 
letter, " and, laying things together, form some reflections, pleasing 
to myself. The produce of one of these reveries you have read 
above." This prognostication, so early in his own life, so early in 
the history of the country, of independence, of vast increase of 
numbers, of naval force, of such augmented power as might defy 
all Europe, is remarkable. It is more remarkable, that its author 
should live to see fulfilled to the letter, what could have seemed 
to others, at the time, but the extravagance of youthful fancy. 
His earliest political feelings were thus strongly American ; and 
from this ardent attachment to his native soil he never departed. 

While still living at Quincy, and at the age of twenty-four, Mr. 
Adams was present, in this town, on the argument before the Su- 
preme Court, respecting writs of assistance, and heard the cele- 
brated and patriotic speech of James Otis. Unquestionably, that 
was a masterly performance. No flighty declamation about liber- 
ty, no superficial discussion of popular topics, it was a learned, 
penetrating, convincing, constitutional argument, expressed in a 
strain of high and resolute patriotism. He grasped the question, 
then pending between England and her colonies, with the strength 
of a lion ; and if he sometimes sported, it was only because the 
lion himself is sometimes playful. Its success appears to have 
been as great as his merits, and its impression was widely felt. 
Mr. Adams himself seems never to have lost the feeling it pro- 
duced, and to have entertained constantly the fillest conviction ot 
its important effects. " I do say," he observes, " in the most sol- 
emn manner, that Mr. Otis's oration against writs of assistance 
oreathed into this nation the breath of life." 

41 Ppp 



432 



MR. WEBSTER'S EULOGY ON 



In 1765, Mr. Adams laid before the public what I suppose to 
be his first printed performance, except essays for the periodical 
press, a Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law. The object 
of this work was to show that our New England ancestors, in 
consenting to exile themselves from their native land, were actu- 
ated, mainly, by the desire of delivering themselves from the 
power of the hierarchy, and from the monarchical and aristocratica] 
political systems of the other continent ; and to make this truth bear 
with effect on the politics of the times. Its tone is uncommonly 
bold and animated, for that period. He calls on the people not 
only to defend, but to study and understand their rights and privi- 
leges ; urges earnestly the necessity of diffusing general knowledge, 
invokes the clergy and the bar, the colleges and academies, and 
all others who have the ability and the means, to expose the insid- 
ious designs of arbitrary power, to resist its approaches, and to be 
persuaded that there is a settled design on foot to enslave all 
America. " Be it remembered," says the author, " that liberty 
must, at all hazards, be supported. We have a right to it, de- 
rived from our Maker. But if we had not, our fathers have 
earned it, and bought it for us, at the expense of their ease, their 
estate, their pleasure, and their blood. And liberty cannot be 
preserved without a general knowledge among the people, who 
have a right, from the frame of their nature, to knowledge, as 
their great Creator, who does nothing in vain, has given them un- 
derstandings, and a desire to know ; but besides this, they have a 
right, an undisputable, unalienable, indefeasible right to that most 
dreaded and envied kind of knowledge, I mean of the character 
and conduct of their rulers. Rulers are no more than attorneys, 
agents, and trustees, of the people ; and if the cause, the interest, 
and trust, is insidiously betrayed, or wantonly trifled away, the 
people have a right to revoke the authority that they themselves 
have deputed, and to constitute other and better agents, attorneys 
and trustees." 

The citizens of this town conferred on Mr. Adams his first po- 
litical distinction, and clothed him with his first political trust, by 
electing him one of their representatives, in 1770. Before this 
time he had become extensively known throughout the province, 
as well by the part he had acted in relation to public affairs, as by 
the exercise of his professional ability. He was among those who 
took the deepest interest in the controversy with England, and 
whether in or out of the legislature, his time and talents were 
alike devoted to the cause. In the years 1773 and 1774, he was 
chosen a counsellor, by the members of the General Court, but 
rejected by governor Hutchinson, in the former of those years, 
and by governor Gage in the latter. 

The time was now at hand, however, when the affairs of the 



ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. 



483 



colonies urgently demanded united councils. An open rupture 
with the parent state appeared inevitable, and it was but the dictate 
of prudence, that those who were united by a common interest 
and a common danger, should protect that interest, and guard 
against that danger, by united efforts. A general congress of 
delegates from all the colonies having been proposed and agreed 
to, the house of representatives, on the 17th of June, 1774, elect- 
ed James Bowdoin, Thomas Gushing, Samuel Adams, John Adams, 
and Robert Treat Paine, delegates from Massachusetts. This ap- 
pointment was made at Salem, where the general court had been 
convened by governor Gage, in the last hour of the existence of a 
house of representatives under the provincial charter. While en- 
gaged in this important business, the governor, having been informed 
of what was passing, sent his secretary with a message dissolving the 
general court. The secretary, finding the door locked, directed 
the messenger to go in and inform the speaker that the secretary 
was at the door with a message from the governor. The messenger 
returned, and informed the secretary that the orders of the house 
were that the doors should be kept fast ; whereupon the secretary 
soon after read a proclamation, dissolving the general court upon 
the stairs. Thus terminated, forever, the actual exercise of the 
political power of England in or over Massachusetts. The four 
last-named delegates accepted their appointments, and took their 
seats in congress, the first day of its meeting, September 5, 1774, 
in Philadelphia. 

The proceedings of the first congress are well known, and have 
been universally admired. It is in vain that we would look for « 
superior proofs of wisdom, talent and patriotism. Lord Chatham 
said, that, for himself, he must declare, that he had studied and admir- 
ed the free states of antiquity, the master states of the world, but 
that, for solidity of reasoning, force of sagacity, and wisdom of con- 
clusion, no body of men could stand in preference to this congress. 
It is hardly inferior praise to say, that no production of that great 
man himself can be pronounced superior to several of the papers 
published as the proceedings of this most able, most firm, most 
patriotic assembly. There is, indeed, nothing superior to them in 
the range of political disquisition. They not only embrace, il- 
lustrate, and enforce every thing which political philosophy, the 
love of liberty, and the spirit of free inquiry, had antecedently 
produced, but they add new and striking views of their own, and 
apply the whole, with irresistible force, in support of the cause 
which had drawn them together. 

Mr. Adams was a constant attendant on the deliberations of 
this body, and bore an active part in its important measures. He 
was of the committee to state the rights of the colonies, and of 
that also which reported the address to the king. 



434 



MR. WEBSTER'S EULOGY ON 



As it was in the continental congress, fellow-citizens, that those 
whose deaths have given rise to this occasion, were first brought to- 
gether, and called on to unite their industry and their ability in 
the service of the country, let us now turn to the other of these 
distinguished men, and take a brief notice of his life, up to the 
period when he appeared within the walls of congress. 

Thomas Jefferson, descended from ancestors who had been set- 
tled in Virginia for some generations, was born near the spot on 
which he died, in the county of Albemarle, on the 2d of April 
(old style), 1743. His youthful studies were pursued in' the 
neighborhood of his father's residence, until he was removed to 
the college of William and Mary, the highest honors of which he 
in due time received. Having left the college with reputation, he 
applied himself to the study of the law, under the tuition of 
George Wythe, one of the highest judicial names of which that 
state can boast. At an early age he was elected a member of 
the legislature, in which he had no sooner appeared than he dis- 
tinguished himself, by knowledge, capacity, and promptitude. 

Mr. Jefferson appears to have been imbued with an early love 
of letters and science, and to have cherished a strong disposition to 
pursue these objects. To the physical sciences, especially, and to 
ancient classic literature, he is understood to have had a warm 
attachment, and never entirely to have lost sight of them, in the 
midst of the busiest occupations. But the times were times for 
action, rather than for contemplation. The country was to be de- 
fended, and to be saved, before it could be enjoyed. Philosophic 
leisure and literary pursuits, and even the objects of professional 
attention, were all necessarily postponed to the urgent calls of the 
public service. The exigency of the country made the same de- 
mand on Mr. Jefferson that it made on others who had the ability 
and the disposition to serve it : and he obeyed the call — thinking 
and feeling, in this respect, with the great Roman orator : Quis 
enim est tarn cupidus in perspicienda cognoscendaque rerum natura, 
ut, si ei tractanti contemplantique res cognitione dignissimas subito 
sit allatum periculum discrimenque patriae, cui subvenire opitulari- 
que possit, non ilia omnia relinquat atque abjiciat, etiam si dinu- 
merare se Stellas, aut metiri mundi magnitudinem posse arbitretur ? 

Entering, with all his heart, into the cause of liberty, his ability, 
patriotism, and power with the pen. naturally drew upon him a 
large participation in the most important concerns. Wherever he 
was, there was found a soul devoted to the cause, power to de- 
fend and maintain it, and willingness to incur all its hazards. In 
] 774, he published a Summary View of the Rights of British 
America, a valuable production among those intended to show the 
d angers which threatened the liberties of the country, and to en- 
rourage the people in their defence. In June, 1775, he was elect- 



ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. 



485 



ed a member of the continental congress, as successor to Peyton 
Randolph, who had retired on account of ill health, and took his 
seat in that body on the 21st of the same month. 

And now, fellow-citizens, without pursuing the biography of 
these illustrious men further, for the present, let us turn our atten- 
tion to the most prominent act of their lives, their participation in 
the Declaration of Independence. 

Preparatory to the introduction of that important measure, a 
committee, at the head of which was Mr. Adams, had reported a 
resolution, which congress adopted the 10th of May, recommend- 
ing, in substance, to all the colonies which had not already estab- 
lished governments suited to the exigencies of their affairs, to adopt 
such government, as would, in the opinion of the representatives 
of the people, best conduce to the happiness and safety of their 
constituents in particular, and America in general. 

This significant vote was soon followed by the direct proposi- 
tion, which Richard Henry Lee had the honor to submit to con- 
gress, by resolution, on the 7th day of June. The published 
journal does not expressly state it, but there is no doubt, I sup- 
pose, that this resolution was in the same words, when originally 
submitted by Mr. Lee, as when finally passed. Having been dis- 
cussed, on Saturday the 8th, and Monday the 10th of June, this 
resolution was on the last-mentioned day postponed, for further 
consideration, to the 1st day of July ; and, at the same time, it 
was voted, that a committee be appointed to prepare a declaration, 
to the effect of the resolution. This committee was elected by 
ballot, on the following day, and consisted of Thomas Jefferson, 
John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman, and Robert R. 
Livingston. 

It is usual, when committees are elected by ballot, that their 
members are arranged in order, according to the number of votes 
which each has received ; Mr. Jefferson, therefore, had received 
the highest, and Mr. Adams the next highest number of votes. 
The difference is said to have been but of a single vote. Mr. Jef- 
ferson and Mr. Adams, standing thus at the head of the committee, 
were requested by the other members to act as a sub-committee, 
to prepare the draught ; and Mr. Jefferson drew up the paper. The 
original draught, as brought by him from his study, and submit- 
ted to the other members of the committee, with interlineations in 
the hand-writing of Dr. Franklin, and others in that of Mr. Ad- 
ams, was in Mr. Jefferson's possession at the time of his death. 
The merit of this paper is Mr. Jefferson's. Some changes were 
made in it, on the suggestion of other members of the committee, 
and others by congress while it was under discussion ; but none 
of them altered the tone, the frame, the arrangement, or the ger. 
eral character of the instrument. As a composition, the declarn 
41 



488 



MR. WEBSTER'S EULOGY ON 



tion is Mr. Jefferson's. It is the production of his mind, and the 
high honor of it belongs to him, clearly and absolutely. 

It has sometimes been said, as if it were a derogation from the 
merits of this paper, that it contains nothing new ; that it only 
states grounds of proceeding, and presses topics of argument, 
which had often been stated and pressed before. But it was not 
the object of the declaration to produce any thing new. It was 
not to invent reasons for independence, but to state those which 
governed the congress. For great and sufficient causes, it was 
proposed to declare independence ; and the proper business of the 
paper to be drawn, was to set forth those causes, and justify the 
authors of the measure, in any event of fortune, to the country, 
and to posterity. The cause of American independence, more- 
over, was now to be presented to the world, in such manner, if it 
might so be, as to engage its sympathy, to command its respect, 
to attract its admiration ; and in an assembly of most able and dis- 
tinguished men, Thomas Jefferson had the high honor of being 
the selected advocate of this cause. To say that he performed 
his great work well, would be doing him injustice. To say that he did 
excellently well, admirably well, would be inadequate and halting 
praise. Let us rather say, that he so discharged the duty assigned 
him, that all Americans may well rejoice that the work of drawing 
the title-deed of their liberties devolved on his hands. 

With all its merits, there are those who have thought that there 
was one thing in the declaration to be regretted ; and that is, the 
asperity and apparent anger with which it speaks of the person 
of the king ; the industrious ability with which it accumulates and 
charges' upon him all the injuries which the colonies had suffered 
from the mother country. Possibly some degree of injustice, 
now or hereafter, at home or abroad, may be done to the charac- 
ter of Mr. Jefferson, if this part of the declaration be not placed 
in its proper light. Anger or resentment, certainly, much less 
personal reproach and invective, could not properly find place in 
a composition of such high dignity, and of such lofty and perma- 
nent character. 

A single reflection on the original ground of dispute, between 
England and the colonies, is sufficient to remove any unfavorable 
impression, in this respect. 

The inhabitants of all the colonies, while colonies, admitted 
themselves bound by their allegiance to the king ; but they dis- 
claimed, altogether, the authority of parliament ; holding them- 
selves, in this respect, to resemble the condition of Scotland and 
Ireland, before the respective unions of those kingdoms with Eng- 
land, when they acknowledged allegiance to the same king, but 
each had its separate legislature. The tie, therefore, which our 
re volution was to break, did not subsist between us and the British 



ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. 



487 



parliament, or between us and the British government in the aggre- 
gate, but directly between us and the king himself. The colonies 
had never admitted themselves subject to parliament. That was 
precisely the point of the original controversy. They had uniformly 
denied that parliament had authority to make laws for them. There 
was, therefore, no subjection to parliament to be thrown ofF. # But 
allegiance to the king did exist, and had been uniformly acknowl- 
edged ; and down to 1775, the most solemn assurances had been 
given that it was not intended to break that allegiance, or to throw 
it off. Therefore, as the direct object and only effect of the 
declaration, according to the principles on which the controversy 
had been maintained, on our part, was to sever the tie of allegiance 
which bound us to the king, it was properly and necessarily found- 
ed on acts of the crown itself, as its justifying causes. Parliament 
is not so much as mentioned in the whole instrument. When 
odious and oppressive acts are referred to, it is done by charging 
the king with confederating with others " in pretended acts of 
legislation ; " the object being, constantly, to hold the king himself 
directly responsible for those measures which were the grounds of 
separation. Even the precedent of the English revolution was not 
overlooked, and in this case, as well as in that, occasion was found 
to say that the king had abdicated the government. Consistency 
with the principles upon which resistance began, and with all the 
previous state papers issued by congress, required that the decla- 
ration should be bottomed on the misgovernment of the king ; and 
therefore it was properly framed with that aim and to that end. 
The king w r as known, indeed, to have acted, as in other cases, by 
his ministers, and with his parliament ; but as our ancestors had 
never admitted themselves subject either to ministers or to parlia- 
ment, there were no reasons to be given for now refusing obedience 
to their authority. This clear and obvious necessity of founding 
the declaration on the misconduct of the king himself, gives to that 
instrument its personal application, and its character of direct and 
pointed accusation. 

The declaration having been reported to congress by the com- 
mittee, the resolution itself w T as taken up and debated on the first 
day of July, and again on the second, on which last day it was 
agreed to and adopted, in these words : — 

" Resolved, That these united colonies are, and of right ought 

* This question (of the power of parliament over the colonies) was discussed 
with singular ability, by Gov. Hutchinson on the one side, and the house of 
representatives of Massachusetts on the other, in 1773. The argument of the 
house is in the form of an answer to the governor's message, and was reported 
by Mr. Samuel Adams, Mr. Hancock, Mr. Hawley, Mr. Bowers, Mr. Hobson, 
Mr. Foster, Mr. Phillips, and Mr. Thayer. As the power of the parliament had 
been acknowledged — so far, at least, as to affect us by laws of trade — it waa 
not easy to settle the line of distinction. It was thought, however, to be very 
clear, that the charters of the colonies had exempted them from the general 
legislation of the British parliament. See Massachusetts State Papers, p. 351. 



488 



MR. WEBSTER'S EULOGY ON 



to be, free and independent states ; that they are absolved from all 
allegiance to the British crown, and that all political connection 
between them and the state of Great Britain is, and ought to be, 
totally dissolved." 

Having thus passed the main resolution, congress proceeded to 
consider the reported draught of the declaration. It was discussed 
on the second, and third, and fourth days of the month, in com- 
mittee of the whole ; and on the last of those days, being reported 
from that committee, it received the final approbation and sanction 
of congress. It was ordered, at the same time, that copies be 
sent to the several states, and that it be proclaimed at the head of 
the army. The declaration, thus published, did not bear the names 
of the members, for as yet it had not been signed by them. It 
was authenticated, like other papers of the congress, by the sig- 
natures of the president and secretary. On the 19th of July, as 
appears by the secret journal, congress " resolved that the decla- 
ration, passed on the fourth, be fairly engrossed on parchment, 
with the title and style of - The unanimous declaration of the 
Thirteen United States of America,' and that the same, when en- 
grossed, be signed by every member of congress :" and, on the 
second day of August following, " the declaration, being engrossed 
and compared at the table, was signed by the members." ' So 
that it happens, fellow-citizens, that we pay these honors to their 
memory on the anniversary of that day on which these great men 
actually signed their names to the declaration. The declaration 
was thus made — that is, it passed, and was adopted as an act of 
congress — on the fourth of July ; it was then signed and certified 
by the president and secretary, like other acts. The fourth of 
July, therefore, is the anniversary of the declaration ; but the 
signatures of the members present were made to it, it being then 
engrossed on parchment, on the second day of August. Absent 
members afterwards signed, as they came in ; and indeed it bears 
the names of some who were not chosen members of congress 
until after the fourth of July. The interest belonging to the sub 
ject will be sufficient, I hope, to justify these details. 

The congress of the revolution, fellow-citizens, sat with closed 
doors, and no report of its debates was ever taken. The discus- 
sion, therefore, which accompanied this great measure, has never 
been preserved, except in memory and by tradition. But it is, I 
believe, doing no injustice to others to say, that the general opin- 
ion was, and uniformly has been, that in debate, on the side of 
independence, John Adams had no equal. The great author of 
the declaration himself has expressed that opinion uniformly and 
strongly. " John Adams," said he, in the hearing of him who 
has now the honor to address you, "John Adams was our colossus 
on the floor. Not graceful, not eloquent, not always fluent, in his 



ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. 



489 



public addresses, he yet came out with a power, both of thought 
and of expression, which moved us from our seats." 

For the part which he was here to perform, Mr. Adams was 
doubtless eminently fitted. He possessed a bold spirit, which 
disregarded danger, and a sanguine reliance on the goodness of the 
cause, and the virtues of the people, which led him to overlook all 
obstacles. His character, too, had been formed in troubled times. 
He had been rocked in the early storms of the controversy, and 
had acquired a decision and a hardihood proportioned to the 
severity of the discipline which he had undergone. 

He not only loved the American cause devoutly, but had studied 
and understood it. It was all familiar to him. He had tried his 
powers, on the questions which it involved, often, and in various 
ways ; and had brought to their consideration whatever of argu- 
ment or illustration the history of his own country, the history of 
England, or the stores of ancient or of legal learning could furnish. 
Every grievance enumerated in the long catalogue of the declara- 
tion had been the subject of his discussion, and the object of his 
remonstrance and reprobation. From 1760, the colonies, the 
rights of the colonies, the liberties of the colonies, and the wrongs 
inflicted on the colonies, had engaged his constant attention ; and 
it has surprised those, who have had the opportunity of observing, 
with what full remembrance, and with what prompt recollection, 
he could refer, in his extreme old age, to every act of parliament 
affecting the colonies, distinguishing and stating their respective 
titles, sections and provisions, — and to all the colonial memorials, 
remonstrances and petitions, with whatever else belonged to the 
intimate and exact history of the times from that year to 1775. It 
was, in his own judgment, between these years, that the American 
people came to a full understanding and thorough knowledge of 
their rights, and to a fixed resolution of maintaining them ; and, 
bearing himself an active part in all important transactions — the 
controversy with England being then, in effect, the business of his 
life — facts, dates, and particulars, made an impression which was 
never effaced. He was prepared, therefore, by education and 
discipline, as well as by natural talent and natural temperament, 
for the part which he was now to act. 

The eloquence of Mr. Adams resembled his general character, 
and formed, indeed, a part of it. It was bold, manly and ener- 
getic ; and such the crisis required. When public bodies are to 
be addressed on momentous occasions, when great interests are at 
stake and strong passions excited, nothing is valuable, in speech, 
farther than it is connected with high intellectual and moral en- 
dowments Clearness, force, and earnestness, are the qualities 
which produce conviction. True eloquence, indeed, does not 
consist in speech. It cannot be brought from far. Labor ana 



490 



MR. WEBSTER'S EULOGY ON 



learning may toil for it; but they will toil in vain. Words and 
phrases may be marshalled in every way; but they cannot compass 
it. It must exist in the man, in the subject, and in the occasion. 
Affected passion, intense expression, the pomp of declamation, 
all may aspire after it — they cannot reach it. It comes, if it come 
at all, like the outbreaking of a fountain from the earth, or the 
bursting forth of volcanic fires, with spontaneous, original, native 
force. The graces taught in the schools, the costly ornaments, 
and studied contrivances of speech, shock and disgust men, when 
their own lives, and the fate of their wives, their children, and 
their country, hang on the decision of the hour. Then, words 
have lost their power, rhetoric is vain, and all elaborate oratory 
contemptible. Even genius itself then feels rebuked and sub- 
dued, as in the presence of higher qualities. Then, patriotism is 
eloquent ; then, self-devotion is eloquent. The clear conception, 
outrunning the deductions. of logic, — the high purpose, — the firm 
resolve, — the dauntless spirit, speaking on the tongue, beaming 
from the eye, informing every feature, and urging the whole man 
onward, right onward, to his object, — this, this is eloquence ; or, 
rather, it is something greater and higher than all eloquence, — it 
is action, noble, sublime, godlike action. 

In July, 1776, the controversy had passed the stage of argument. 
An appeal had been made to force, and opposing armies were in 
the field. Congress, then, was to decide whether the tie which 
had so long bound us to the parent state, was to be severed at 
once, and severed forever. All the colonies had signified their 
resolution to abide by this decision, and the people looked for it 
with the most intense anxiety. And surely, fellow-citizens, never, 
never were men called to a more important political deliberation. 
If we contemplate it from the point where they then stood, no 
question could be more full of interest : if we look at it now, 
and judge of its importance by its effects, it appears in still greater 
magnitude. 

Let us, then, bring before us the assembly, which was about to 
decide a question thus big with the fate of empire. Let us open 
their doors, and look in upon their deliberations. Let us survey 
the anxious and care-worn countenances — let us hear the firm- 
toned voices, of this band of patriots. 

Hancock presides over the solemn sitting ; and one of those not 
yet prepared to pronounce for absolute independence, is on the 
floor, and is urging his reasons for dissenting from the declaration. 

"Let us pause ! This step, once taken, cannot be retraced. 
This resolution, once passed, will cut off all hope of reconciliation. 
If success attend the arms of England, we shall then be no longer 
colonies, w 7 ith charters, and with privileges. These will all be 
forfeited oy this act ; and we shall be in the condition of othe r 



ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. 



491 



conquered people — at the mercy of the conquerors. For our- 
selves, we may be ready to run the hazard ; but are we ready to 
carry the country to that length ? — Is success so probable as to 
justify it ? Where is the military, where the naval, power, by 
which we are to resist the whole strength of the arm of England ? 
for she will exert that strength to the utmost. Can we rely on 
the constancy and perseverance of the people ? — or will they not 
act as the people of other countries have acted, and, wearied with 
a long war, submit, in the end, to a worse oppression ? While we 
stand on our old ground, and insist on redress of grievances, we 
know we are right, and are not answerable for consequences. 
Nothing, then, can be imputable to us. But if we now change 
our object, carry our pretensions farther, and set up for absolute 
independence, we shall lose the sympathy of mankind. We shall 
no longer be defending what we possess, but struggling for some- 
thing which we never did possess, and which we have solemnly 
and uniformly disclaimed all intention of pursuing, from the very 
outset of the troubles. Abandoning thus our old ground, of resist- 
ance only to arbitrary acts of oppression, the nations will believe 
the whole to have been mere pretence, and they will look on us, 
not as injured, but as ambitious subjects. I shudder before this 
responsibility. It will be on us, if, relinquishing the ground we 
have stood on so long, and stood on so safely, we now proclaim 
independence, and carry on the war for that object, while these 
cities burn, these pleasant fields whiten and bleach with the bones 
of their owners, and these streams run blood. It will be upon us, 
it will be upon us, if, failing to maintain this unseasonable and 
ill-judged declaration, a sterner despotism, maintained by military 
power, shall be established over our posterity, when we ourselves, 
given up by an exhausted, a harassed, a misled people, shall have 
expiated our rashness and atoned for our presumption on the 
scaffold." 

It was for Mr. Adams to reply to arguments like these. We 
know his opinions, and we know his character. He would com- 
mence with his accustomed directness and earnestness. 

" Sink or swim, live or die, survive or perish, I give my hand 
and my heart to this vote. It is true, indeed, that in the beginning 
we aimed not at independence. But there's a divinity which 
shapes our ends. The injustice of England has driven us to arms; 
and, blinded to her own interest, for our good, she has obstinately 
persisted, till independence is now within our grasp. We have 
but. to reach forth to it, and it is ours. Why, then, should we 
defer the declaration ? Is any man so weak as now to hope for a 
reconciliation with England, which shall leave either safety to the 
country and its liberties, or safety to his own lite and iiis own 
honor? Are not you, sir, who sit in that chair, — is not he, our ven- 



492 



MR. WEBSTER'S EULOGY ON 



erable colleague near you, — are you not both already the proscribed 
and predestined objects of punishment and of vengeance? Cut off 
from all hope of royal clemency, what are you, what can you be, 
while the power of England remains, but outlaws ? If we post- 
pone independence, do we mean to carry on, or to give up, the 
war? Do we mean to submit to the measures of parliament, Bos- 
ton port-bill and all ? Do we mean to submit, and consent that 
we ourselves shall be ground to powder, and our country and its 
rights trodden down in the dust ? I know we do not mean to 
submit. We never shall submit. Do we intend to violate that 
most solemn obligation ever entered into by men — that plighting, 
before God, of our sacred honor to Washington, when, putting him 
forth to incur the dangers of war, as well as the political hazards 
of the times, we promised to adhere to him, in every extremity, 
with our fortunes and our lives ? I know there is not a man here, 
who would not rather see a general conflagration sweep over the 
land, or an earthquake sink it, than one jot or tittle of that plighted 
faith fall to the ground. For myself, having, twelve months ago, 
in this place, moved you, that George Washington be appointed 
commander of the forces, raised or to be raised, for defence of 
American liberty, may my right hand forget her cunning, and my 
tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth, if I hesitate or waver in the 
support I give him. The war, then, must go on. We must fight 
it through. And if the war must go on, why put off longer the 
declaration of independence ? That measure will strengthen us. 
It will give us character abroad. The nations will then treat with 
us, which they never can do while we acknowledge ourselves sub- 
jects, in arms against our sovereign. Nay, I maintain that England 
herself will sooner treat for peace with us on the footing of inde- 
pendence, than consent, by repealing her acts, to acknowledge that 
her whole conduct towards us has been a course of injustice and 
oppression. Her pride will be less wounded, by submitting to that 
course of things which now predestinates our independence, than 
by yielding the points in controversy to her rebellious subjects. 
The former, she would regard as the result of fortune ; the latter, 
she would feel as her own deep disgrace. Why, then — why, then, 
sir, do we not, as soon as possible, change this from a civil to a 
national war ? And since we must fight it through, why not put 
ourselves in a state to enjoy all the benefits of victory, if we gain 
the victory? 

" If we fail, it can be no worse for us. But we shall not fail. 
The cause will raise up armies : the cause will create navies. 
The people — the people, if we are true to them, will carry us, 
and will carry themselves, gloriously through this struggle. I care 
not how fickle other people have been found. I know the people 
>f these colonies, and I know that resistance to British aggression 



ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. 



493 



is deep and settled in their hearts, and cannot be eradicated. Ev- 
ery colony, indeed, has expressed its willingness to follow, if we 
but take the lead. Sir, the declaration will inspire the people 
with increased courage. Instead of a long and bloody war for 
restoration of privileges, for redress of grievances, for chartered 
immunities, held under a British king, set before them the glorious 
object of entire independence, and it will breathe into them anew 
the breath of life. Read this declaration at the head of the army ; 
every sword will be drawn from its scabbard, and the solemn vow 
uttered, to maintain it, or to perish on the bed of honor. Publish it 
from the pulpit; religion will approve it, and the love of religious 
liberty will cling round it, resolved to stand with it, or fall with 
it. Send it to the public halls ; proclaim it there ; let them hear 
it, who heard the first roar of the enemy's cannon ; let them see 
it, who saw their brothers and their sons fall on the field of Bunker 
Hill, and in the streets of Lexington and Concord, and the very 
walls will cry out in its support. 

" Sir, I know the uncertainty of human affairs, but I see, I see 
clearly, through this day's business. You and I, indeed, may rue 
it. We may not live to the time when this declaration shall be 
made good. We may die; die, colonists; die, slaves; die, it 
maybe, ignominiously and on the scaffold. Be it so. Be it so. If 
it be the pleasure of Heaven that my country shall require the 
poor offering of my life, the victim shall be ready, at the appoint- 
ed hour of sacrifice, come when that hour may. But while I do 
live, let me have a country, or at least the hope of a country, and 
that a free country. 

" But whatever maybe our fate, be assured, be assured, that this 
declaration will stand. It may cost treasure, and it may cost 
blood ; but it will stand, and it will richly compensate for both. 
Through the thick gloom of the present, I see the brightness 
of the future, as the sun in heaven. We shall make this a glori- 
ous, an immortal day. When we are in our graves, our children 
will honor it. They will celebrate it with thanksgiving, with fes- 
tivity, with bonfires and illuminations. On its annual return they 
will shed tears, copious, gushing tears, not of subjection and slave- 
ry, not of agony and distress, but of exultation, of gratitude, and 
of joy. Sir, before God, I believe the hour has come. My judg- 
ment approves this measure, and my whole heart is in it. All 
that I have, and all that I am, and all that I hope, in this life, 1 
am now ready here to stake upon it ; and I leave off, as I began, 
that, live or die, survive or perish, I am for the declaration. It t is 
my living sentiment, and by the blessing of God it shall be my 
dying sentiment ; independence now, and independence forever.'' 

And so that day shall be honored, illustrious prophet and pa- 
triot ! so that day shall be honored, and as often as it returns, thv 
42 



494 



MR. WEBSTER'S EULOGY ON 



renown shall come along with it, and the glory of thy life, like 
the day of thy death, shall not fail from the remembrance of men. 

It would be unjust, fellow-citizens, on this occasion, .while we 
express our veneration for him who is the immediate subject of 
these remarks, were we to omit a most respectful, affectionate, and 
grateful mention of those other great men, his colleagues, who 
stood with him, and, with the same spirit, the same devotion, took 
part in the interesting transaction. Hancock, the proscribed Han- 
cock, exiled from his home by a military governor, cut off, by 
proclamation, from the mercy of the crown — Heaven reserved for 
him the distinguished honor of putting this great question to the vote, 
and of writing his own name first, and most conspicuously, on that 
parchment which spoke defiance to the power of the crown of Eng- 
land. There, too, is the name of that other proscribed patriot, 
Samuel Adams ; a man who hungered and thirsted for the inde- 
pendence of his country ; who thought the declaration halted and 
lingered, being himself not only ready, but eager, for it, long be- 
fore it was proposed ; a man of the deepest sagacity, the clearest 
foresight, and the profoundest judgment in men. And there is 
Gerry, himself among the earliest and the foremost of the patri- 
ots, found, when the battle of Lexington summoned them to com- 
mon councils, by the side of Warren ; a man who lived to serve 
his country at home and abroad, and to die in the second place in 
the government. There, too, is the inflexible, the upright, the 
Spartan character, Robert Treat Paine. He, also, lived to serve 
his country through the struggle, and then withdrew from her 
councils, only that he might give his labors and his life to his na- 
tive state, in another relation. These names, fellow-citizens, are 
the treasures of the commonwealth ; and they are treasures which 
grow brighter by time. 

It is now necessary to resume, and to finish, with great brevity, 
the notice of the lives of those whose virtues and services we 
have met to commemorate. 

Mr. Adams remained in congress from its first meeting, till No- 
vember, 1777, when he was appointed minister to France. He 
proceeded on that service, in the February following, embarking 
in the Boston frigate, on the shore of his native town, at the foot 
of mount Wollaston. The year following, he was appointed 
commissioner to treat of peace with England. Returning to the 
United States, he was a delegate from Braintree in the convention 
for framing the constitution of this commonwealth, in 1780. At 
the latter end of the same year, he again went abroad, in the dip- 
lomatic service of the country, and was employed at various 
courts, and occupied with various negotiations, until 1788. The 
particulars of these interesting and important services this occasion 
does not allow time to relate. In 1782, he concluded our firs 



ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. 



495 



treaty with Holland. His negotiations with that republic ; his ef- 
forts to persuade the States-General to recognize our independence ; 
his incessant and indefatigable exertions to represent the American 
cause favorably, on the continent, and to counteract the designs of 
his enemies, open and secret ; and his successful undertaking to 
obtain loans, on the credit of a nation yet new and unknown, — are 
among his most arduous, most useful, most honorable services. It 
was his fortune to bear a part in the negotiation for peace with 
England, and, in something more than six years from the declara- 
tion which he had so strenuously supported, he had the satisfac- 
tion to see the minister plenipotentiary of the crown subscribe to 
the instrument which declared that his " Britannic majesty acknowl- 
edged the United States to be free, sovereign and independent." 
In these important transactions, Mr. Adams's conduct received the 
marked approbation of congress, and of the country. 

While abroad, in 1787, he published his Defence of the Amer- 
ican Constitutions ; a work of merit and ability, though composed 
with haste, on the spur of a particular occasion, in the midst of 
other occupations, and under circumstances not admitting of care- 
ful revision. The immediate object of the work was to counter- 
act the weight, of opinions advanced by several popular European 
writers of that day — M. Turgot, the Abbe de Mably, and Dr. 
Price — at a time when the people of the United States were em- 
ployed in forming and revising their systems of government. 

Returning to the United States in 1788, he found the new gov- 
ernment about going into operation, and was himself elected the 
first vice-president — a situation which he filled with reputation for 
eight years, at the expiration of which he was raised to the presi- 
dential chair, as immediate successor to the immortal Washington. 
In this high station he was succeeded by Mr. Jefferson, after a 
memorable controversy between their respective friends, in 1801 ; 
and from that period his manner of life has been known to all who 
hear me. He has lived, for five-and-twenty years, with every en 
joyment that could render old age happy. Not inattentive to the 
occurrences of the times, political cares have yet not materially, 
or for any long time disturbed his repose. In 1820, he acted as 
elector of president and vice-president, and in the same year we saw 
him, then at the age of eighty -five, a member of the convention of this 
commonwealth, called to revise the constitution. Forty years be- 
fore, he had been one of those who formed that constitution ; and he 
had now the pleasure of witnessing that there was little which the 
people desired to change. Possessing all his faculties to the end 
of his long life, with an unabated love of reading and contempla- 
tion, in the centre of interesting circles of friendship and affection, 
he was blessed, in his retirement, with whatever of repose and 
felicity the condition of man allows. He had, also, other enjoy- 



496 



MR. WEBSTER'S EULOGY ON 



ments. He saw around him that prosperity and general happi- 
ness, which had been the object of his public cares and labors. 
No man ever beheld more clearly, and for a longer time, the great 
and beneficial effects of the services rendered by himself to his 
country. That liberty, which he so early defended, that independ- 
ence, of which he was so able an advocate and supporter, he saw, 
we trust, firmly and securely established. The population of the 
country thickened around him faster, and extended wider, than his 
own sanguine predictions had anticipated ; and the wealth, respec 
tability, and power, of the nation sprang up to a magnitude which 
it is quite impossible he could have expected to witness in his day. 
He lived, also, to behold those principles of civil freedom, which 
had been developed, established, and practically applied in Amer- 
ica, attract attention, command respect, and awaken imitation, in 
other regions of the globe ; and well might, and well did he, ex- 
claim, " Where will the consequences of the American revolution 
end ? " 

If any thing yet remain to fill this cup of happiness, let it be 
added, that he lived to see a great and intelligent people bestow 
the highest honor in their gift, where he had bestowed his own 
kindest parental affections, and lodged his fondest hopes. Thus 
honored in life, thus happy at death, he saw the jubilee, and he 
died ; and with the last prayers which trembled on his lips, was the 
fervent supplication for his country, " independence forever." 

Mr. Jefferson, having been occupied, in the years 1778 and 
1779, in the important service of revising the laws of Virginia, 
was elected governor of that state, as successor to Patrick Henry, 
and held the situation when the state was invaded by the British 
arms. In 1781, he published his Notes on Virginia, a work which 
attracted attention in Europe as well as America, dispelled many 
misconceptions respecting this continent, and gave its author a 
place among men distinguished for science. In November, 1783, 
he again took his seat in the continental congress ; but in the May 
following was appointed minister plenipotentiary, to act abroad in 
the negotiation of commercial treaties, with Dr. Franklin and Mr. 
Adams. He proceeded to France, in execution of this mission, 
embarking at Boston ; and that was the only occasion on which lie 
ever visited this place. In 1785, he was appointed minister to 
France, the duties of which situation he continued to perform, 
until October, 1789, when he obtained leave to retire, just on the 
eve of that tremendous revolution which has so much agitated the 
world, in our times. Mr. Jefferson's discharge of his diplomatic 
duties was marked by great ability, diligence, and patriotism ; and 
while he resided at Paris, in one of the most interesting periods, 
his character for intelligence, his love of knowledge, and of the 
society of learned men, distinguished him in the highest circles 



ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. 



497 



of the French capital. No court in Europe had, at that time, in 
Paris, a representative commanding or enjoying higher regard, for 
political knowledge or for general attainment, than the minister of 
this then infant republic. Immediately on his return to his native 
country, at the organization of the government under the present 
constitution, his talents and experience recommended him to pres- 
ident Washington, for the first office in his gift. He was placed 
at the head of the department of state. In this situation, also, he 
manifested conspicuous ability. His correspondence with the min- 
isters of other powers residing here, and his instructions to our 
own diplomatic agents abroad, are among our ablest state-papers. 
A thorough knowledge of the laws and usages of nations, perfect 
acquaintance with the immediate subject before him, great felicity, 
and still greater facility, in writing, show themselves in whatever 
effort his official situation called on him to make. It is believed, 
by competent judges, that the diplomatic intercourse of the gov- 
ernment of the United States, from the first meeting of the con- 
tinental congress in 1774 to the present time, taken together, 
would not suffer, in respect to the talent with which it has been 
conducted, by comparison with any thing which other and older 
states can produce ; and to the attainment of this respectability and 
distinction, Mr. Jefferson has contributed his full part. 

On the retirement of general Washington from the presidency, 
and the election of Mr. Adams to that office, in 1797, he was 
chosen vice-president. While presiding, in this capacity, over the 
deliberations of the senate, he compiled and published a Manual 
of Parliamentary Practice — a work of more labor and more merit 
than is indicated by its size. It is now received as the general 
standard by which proceedings are regulated, not only in both 
houses of congress, but in most of the other legislative bodies in 
the country. In 1801, he was elected president, in opposition to 
Mr. Adams, and reelected in 1805, by a vote approaching towards 
unanimity. 

From the time of his final retirement from public life, in 1807, 
Mr. Jefferson lived as became a wise man. Surrounded by affec- 
tionate friends, his ardor in the pursuit of knowledge undiminished, 
with uncommon health, and unbroken spirits, he was able to enjoy 
largely the rational pleasures of life, and to partake in that public 
prosperity which he had so much contributed to produce. His 
kindness and hospitality, the charm of his conversation, the ease 
of his manners, the extent of his acquirements, and especially the 
full store of revolutionary incidents, which he possessed, and which 
he knew when and how to dispense, rendered his abode in a high 
degree attractive to his admiring countrymen ; while his high 
public and scientific character drew towards him every intelligent 
and educated traveller from abroad. Both Mr. Adams and Mr 
42* Rrr 



498 MR. WEBSTER'S EULOGY ON 



Jefferson had the pleasure of knowing that the respect which they 
so largely received, was not paid to their official stations. They 
were not men made great by office ; but great men, on whom the 
country for its own benefit had conferred office. There was that 
in them which office did not give, and which the relinquishment 
of office did not and could not take away. In their retirement, in 
the midst of their fellow-citizens, themselves private citizens, they 
enjoyed as high regard and esteem, as when filling the most 
important places of public trust. 

There remained to Mr. Jefferson yet one other work of patriot- 
ism and beneficence — the establishment of a university in his native 
state. To this object he devoted years of incessant and anxious 
attention, and by the enlightened liberality of the legislature of 
Virginia, and the cooperation of other able and zealous friends, he 
lived to see it accomplished. May all success attend this infant 
seminary ; and may those who enjoy its advantages, as often as 
their eyes shall rest on the neighboring height, recollect what they 
owe to their disinterested and indefatigable benefactor ; and may 
letters honor him who thus labored in the cause of letters. 

Thus useful, and thus respected, passed the old age of Thomas 
Jefferson. But time was on its ever-ceaseless wing, and was now 
bringing the last hour of this illustrious man. He saw its approach 
with undisturbed serenity. He counted the moments as they 
passed, and beheld that his last sands were falling. That day, too, 
was at hand, which he had helped to make immortal. One wish, 
one hope — if it were not presumptuous — beat in his fainting breast. 
Could it be so — might it please God — he would desire — once 
more — to see the sun — once more to look abroad on the scene 
around him, on the great day of liberty. Heaven, in its mercy, 
fulfilled that prayer. He saw that sun — he enjoyed its sacred 
light — he thanked God for this mercy, and bowed his aged head 
to the grave. " Felix, non vitce tantum claritate, sed etiam op- 
portunitate mortis." 

The last public labor of Mr. Jefferson naturally suggests the 
-expression of the high praise which is due, both to- him and to 
Mr. Adams, for their uniform and zealous attachment to learning, 
and to the cause of general knowledge. Of the advantages of 
learning, indeed, and of literary accomplishments, their own char- 
acters were striking recommendations and illustrations. They 
were scholars, ripe and good scholars ; widely acquainted with an- 
cient as well as modern literature, and not altogether uninstructed 
in the deeper sciences. Their acquirements, doubtless, were dif- 
ferent, and so were the particular objects of their literary pursuits ; 
as their tastes and characters, in these respects, differed like those 
of other men. Being, also, men of busy lives, with great objects 
irequiring action constantly before them, their attainments in letters 



ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. 



499 



did not become showy or obtrusive. Yet I would hazard the 
opinion, that if we could now ascertain all the causes which gave 
them eminence and distinction in the midst of the great men with 
whom they acted, we should find, not among the least, their early 
acquisition in literature, the resources which it furnished, the 
promptitude and facility which it communicated, and the wide field 
it opened, for analogy and illustration ; giving them, thus, on every 
subject, a larger view, and a broader range, as well for discussion 
as for the government of their own conduct. 

Literature sometimes, and pretensions to it much oftener, dis- 
gusts, by appearing to hang loosely on the character, like some- 
thing foreign or extraneous, not a part, but an ill-adjusted 
appendage ; or by seeming to overload and weigh it down, by 
its unsightly bulk, like the productions of bad taste in architecture, 
where there is massy and cumbrous ornament, without strength or 
solidity of column. This has exposed learning, and especially 
classical learning, to reproach. Men have seen that it might exist, 
without mental superiority, without vigor, without good taste, and 
without utility. But, in such cases, classical learning has only not 
inspired natural talent ; or, at most, it has but made original fee- 
bleness of intellect, and natural bluntness of perception, something 
more conspicuous. The question, after all, if it be a question, is, 
whether literature, ancient as well as modern, does not assist a good 
understanding, improve natural good taste, add polished armor to 
native strength, and render its possessor not only more capable of 
deriving private happiness from contemplation and reflection, but 
more accomplished, also, for action in the affairs of life, and espe- 
cially for public action. Those whose memories w T e now honor, 
were learned men; but their learning was kept in its proper place, 
and made subservient to the uses and objects of life. They were 
scholars, not common, nor superficial ; but their scholarship was so 
in keeping with their character, so blended and inwrought, that 
careless observers, or bad judges, not seeing an ostentatious dis- 
play of it, might infer that it did not exist ; forgetting, or not 
knowing, that classical learning, in men who act in conspicuous 
public stations, perform duties which exercise the faculty of writ- 
ing, or address popular, deliberative, or judicial bodies, is often 
felt, where it is little seen, and sometimes felt more effectually, 
because it is not seen at all. 

But the cause of knowledge, in a more enlarged sense, the 
cause of general knowledge and of popular education, had no 
warmer friends, nor more powerful advocates, than Mr. Adams 
and Mr. Jefferson. On this foundation, they knew, the whole re- 
publican system rested ; and this great and all-important truth they 
strove to impress by all the means in their power. In the early 
publication, already referred to, Mr. Adams expresses the strong 



500 



MR. WEBSTER'S EULOGY ON 



and just sentiment, that the education of the poor is more impor- 
tant, even to the rich themselves, than all their own riches. On 
this great truth, indeed, is founded that unrivalled, that invaluable 
political and moral institution, our own blessing, and the glory of 
our fathers — the New England system of free schools. 

As the promotion of knowledge had been the object of their 
regard through life, so these great men made it the subject of their 
testamentary bounty. Mr. Jefferson is understood to have be- 
queathed his library to the university, and that of Mr. Adams is 
bestowed on the inhabitants of Quincy. 

Mr. Adams and Mr. Jefferson, fellow-citizens, were successively 
presidents of the United States. The comparative merits of their 
respective administrations for a long time agitated and divided pub- 
lic opinion. They were rivals, each supported by numerous and 
powerful portions of the people, for the highest office. This con- 
test, partly the cause, and partly the consequence, of the long 
existence of two great political parties in the country, is now part 
of the history of our government. We may naturally regret that 
any thing should have occurred to create difference and discord 
between those who had acted harmoniously and efficiently in the 
great concerns of the revolution. But this is not the time, nor 
this the occasion, for entering into the grounds of that difference, 
or for attempting to discuss the merits of the questions which it 
involves. As practical questions, they were canvassed when the 
measures which they regarded were acted on and adopted ; and 
as belonging to history, the time has not come for their consid- 
eration. 

It is, perhaps, not wonderful, that when the constitution of the 
United States went first into operation, different opinions should be 
entertained as to the extent of the powers conferred by it. Here 
was a natural source of diversity of sentiment. It is still less 
wonderful, that that event, about contemporary with our govern- 
ment, under the present constitution, which so entirely shocked all 
Europe, and disturbed our relations with her leading powers, should 
be thought, by different men, to have different bearings on our own 
prosperity ; and that the early measures adopted by our govern- 
ment, in consequence of this new state of things, should be seen 
in opposite lights. It is for the future historian, when what now 
remains of prejudice and misconception shall have passed away, 
to state these different opinions, and pronounce impartial judg- 
ment. In the mean time, all good men rejoice, and well may re- 
joice, that the sharpest differences sprung out of measures, which, 
whether right or wrong, have ceased, with the exigencies that 
gave them birth, and have left no permanent effect, either on the 
constitution, or on the general prosperity of the country. This 
remark, I am aware, may be supposed to have its exception in one 



ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. 



501 



measure, the alteration of the constitution as to the mode of 
choosing president ; but it is true in its general application. Thus 
the course of policy pursued towards France, in 1798, on the one 
hand, and the measures of commercial restriction, commenced in 
1807, on the other, both subjects of warm and severe opposition, 
have passed away, and left nothing behind them. They were 
temporary, and, whether wise or unwise, their consequences were 
limited to their respective occasions. It is equally clear, at the 
same time, and it is equally gratifying, that those measures of both 
administrations, which were of durable importance, and which 
drew after them interesting and long-remaining consequences, have 
received general approbation. Such was the organization, or rather 
the creation, of the navy, in the administration of Mr. Adams ; 
such the acquisition of Louisiana, in that of Mr. Jefferson. The 
country, it may safely be added, is not likely to be willing either 
to approve, or to reprobate, indiscriminately, and in the aggregate, 
all the measures of either, or of any, administration. The dictate 
of reason and of justice is, that, holding each one his own senti- 
ments on the points in difference, we imitate the great men them- 
selves, in the forbearance and moderation which they have 
cherished, and in the mutual respect and kindness which they have 
been so much inclined to feel and to reciprocate. 

No men, fellow-citizens, ever served their country with more 
entire exemption from every imputation of selfish and mercenary 
motive than those to whose memory we are paying these proofs 
of respect. A suspicion of any disposition to enrich themselves, 
or to profit by their public employments, never rested on either. 
No sordid motive approached them. The inheritance which they 
have left to their children, is of their character and their fame. 

Fellow-citizens, I will detain you no longer by this faint and fee- 
ble tribute to the memory of the illustrious dead. Even in other 
hands, adequate justice could not be performed, within the limits 
of this occasion. Their highest, their best praise, is your deep 
conviction of their merits, your affectionate gratitude for their labors 
and services. It is not my voice, — it is this cessation of ordinary 
pursuits, this arresting of all attention, these solemn ceremonies, 
and this crowded house, which speak their eulogy. Their fame, 
indeed, is safe. That is now treasured up beyond the reach of 
accident. Although no sculptured marble should rise to their 
memory, nor engraved stone bear record of their deeds, yet will 
their remembrance be as lasting as the land they honored. Mar- 
ble columns may, indeed, moulder into dust, time may erase all 
impress from the crumbling stone, but their fame remains ; for with 
American liberty it rose, and with American liberty only 
can it perish. It was the last swelling peal of yonder choir, " Their 

BODIES ARE BURIED IN PEACE, BUT THEIR NAME LIVETH EVER 



502 



MR. WEBSTER'S EULOGY ON 



more." I catch that solemn song, I echo that loft)' strain of fu- 
neral triumph, " Their name liveth evermore." 

Of the illustrious signers of the Declaration of Independence 
there now remains only Charles Carroll. He seems an aged oak, 
standing alone on the plain, which time has spared a little longer, 
after all its contemporaries have been levelled with the dust. 
Venerable object ! we delight to gather round its trunk, while yet 
it stands, and to dwell beneath its shadow. Sole survivor of an 
assembly of as great men as the world has witnessed, in a transac- 
tion, one of the most important that history records, what thoughts, 
what interesting reflections must fill his elevated and devout soul ! 
If he dwell on the past, how touching its recollections ; if he sur- 
vey the present, how happy, how joyous, how full of the fruition 
of that hope, which his ardent patriotism indulged ; if he glance 
at the future, how does the prospect of his country's advancement 
almost bewilder his weakened conception ! Fortunate, distinguished 
patriot ! Interesting relic of the past ! Let him know that while 
we honor the dead, we do not forget the living ; and that there is 
not a heart here which does not fervently pray that Heaven may 
keep him yet back from the society of his companions. 

And now, fellow-citizens, let us not retire from this occasion 
without a deep and solemn conviction of the duties which have 
devolved upon us. This lovely land, this glorious liberty, these 
benign institutions, the dear purchase of our fathers, are ours : 
ours to enjoy, ours to preserve, ours to transmit. Generations 
past, and generations to come, hold us responsible for this sacred 
trust. Our fathers, from behind, admonish us, with their anxious 
paternal voices ; posterity calls out to us, from the bosom of the 
future ; the world turns hither its solicitous eyes — all, all conjure us 
to act wisely, and faithfully, in the relation which we sustain. We 
can never, indeed, pay the debt which is upon us ; but by virtue, 
by morality, by religion, by the cultivation of every good princi- 
ple and every good habit, we may hope to en'py the blessing, 
through our day, and to leave it unimpaired to our children. Let 
us feel deeply how much, of what we are and of what we possess, 
we owe to this liberty, and these institutions of government. Na- 
ture has, indeed, given us a soil which yields bounteously to the 
hands of industry ; the mighty and fruitful ocean is before us, and 
the skies over our heads shed health and vigor. But what are 
lands, and seas, and skies, to civilized man, without society, with- 
out knowledge, without morals, without religious culture ? and how 
can these be enjoyed, in all their extent, and all their excellence, 
but under the protection of wise institutions and a free govern- 
ment ? Fellow-citizens, there is not one of us, there is not one 
of us here present, who does not, at this moment, and at every 
moment, experience in his own condition, and in the condition of 



ADAMS AND JEFFERSON. 



503 



those most near and dear to him, the influence and the benefits of 
this liberty, and these institutions. Let us then acknowledge the 
blessing ; let us feel it deeply and powerfully ; let us cherish a strong 
affection for it, and resolve to maintain and perpetuate it. The 
blood of our fathers, let it not have been shed in vain ; the great 
hope of posterity, let it not be blasted. 

The striking attitude, too, in which we stand to the world around 
us, — a topic to which, I fear, I advert too often, and dwell on too 
long, — cannot be altogether omitted here. Neither individuals nor 
nations can perform their part well, until they understand and feel 
its importance, and comprehend and justly appreciate all the du- 
ties belonging to it. It is not to inflate national vanity, nor to 
swell a light and empty feeling of self-importance ; but it is that 
we may judge justly of our situation, and of our own duties, that 
I earnestly urge this consideration of our position, and our charac- 
ter, among the nations of the earth. It cannot be denied, but by 
those who would dispute against the sun, that with America, and 
in America, a new era commences in human affairs. This era is 
distinguished by free representative governments, by entire reli- 
gious liberty, by improved systems of national intercourse, by a 
newly awakened and an unconquerable spirit of free inquiry, and 
by a diffusion of knowledge through the community, such as has 
been before altogether unknown and unheard of. America, Amer- 
ica, our country, fellow-citizens, our own dear and native land, is 
inseparably connected, fast bound up, in fortune and by fate, with 
these great interests. If they fall, we fall with them ; if they 
stand, it will be because we have upholden them. Let us con- 
template, then, this connection, which binds the prosperity of oth- 
ers to our own ; and let us manfully discharge all the duties which 
it imposes. If we cherish the virtues and the principles of our 
fathers, Heaven will assist us to carry on the work of human lib- 
erty and human happiness. Auspicious omens cheer us. Great 
examples are before us. Our own firmament now shines brightly 
upon our path. Washington is in the clear upper sky. Those 
other stars have now joined the American constellation ; they cir- 
cle round their centre, and the heavens beam with new light. 
Beneath this illumination, let us walk the course of life, and at its 
close devoutly commend our beloved country, the common parent 
of us all, to the Divine Benignity. 



504 



A DISCOURSE, 

PRONOUNCED AT CAMBRIDGE, BEFORE 

THE PHI BETA KAPPA SOCIETY, 

AT THE ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION ON THE THIRTY-FIRST DA'S 
OF AUGUST, 1826. 

BY JOSEPH STORY. 



* Gentlemen, 

If I had consulted my own wishes, I should not have presumed 
to address you on the present occasion. The habits of professional 
employment rarely admit of leisure for the indulgence of literary 
taste. And in a science whose mastery demands a whole life of 
laborious diligence, whose details are inexhaustible, and whose 
intricacies task the most acute intellects, it would be matter of 
surprise if every hour withdrawn from its concerns did not some- 
what put at hazard the success of its votary. Nor can it escape 
observation, how much the technical doctrines of a jurisprudence, 
drawn from remote antiquity, and expanding itself over the business 
of many ages, must have a tendency to chill that enthusiasm which 
lends encouragement to every enterprise, and to obscure those finer 
forms of thought which give to literature its lovelier, I may say, its 
inexpressible graces. The consciousness of difficulties of this sort 
may well be supposed to press upon every professional mind. They 
can be overlooked by those only whose youth has not been tried in 
the hard school of experience, or whose genius gives no credit to 
impossibilities. 

I have not hesitated, however, to yield to your invitation, trust- 
ing to that indulgence which has not hitherto been withheld from 
well-meant efforts, and not unwilling to add the testimony of my 
own example, however humble, in favor of the claims of this 
society to the services of all its members. 

We live in an extraordinary age. It has been marked by events 
which will leave a durable- impression upon the pages of history by 
their own intrinsic importance. But they will be read with far 
deeper emotions in their effects upon future ages ; in their conse- 
quences upon the happiness of whole communities ; in the direct 
or silent changes forced by them into the very structure of society; 



MR. STORY'S DISCOURSE, &c. 



505 



in the establishment of a new and mighty empire, the empire of 
public opinion : in the operation of what lord Bacon has charac- 
terized almost as supreme power, the power of knowledge, working 
its way to universality, and interposing checks upon government 
and people, by means gentle and decisive, which have never before 
been fully felt, and are, even now, perhaps, incapable of being per- 
fectly comprehended. 

Other ages have been marked by brilliant feats in arms. Wars 
have been waged for the best and for the worst of purposes. The 
ambitious conqueror has trodden whole nations under his feet, to 
satisfy the lust of power ; and the eagles of his victories have 
stood on either extreme of the civilized world. The barbarian 
has broken loose from his northern fastnesses, and overwhelmed, in 
his progress, temples and thrones, the adorers of the true God, and 
the worshippers of idols. Heroes and patriots have successfully 
resisted the invaders of their country, or perished in its defence ; 
and in each way have given immortality to their exploits. King- 
doms have been rent asunder by intestine broils, or by struggles 
for freedom. Bigotry has traced out the march of its persecutions 
in footsteps of blood, and superstition employed its terrors to 
nerve the arm of the tyrant, or immolate his victims. There have 
been ancient leagues for the partition of empires, for the support 
of thrones, for the fencing out of human improvement, and for the 
consolidation of arbitrary power. There have, too, been bright 
spots on the earth, where the cheering light of liberty shone in 
peace ; where learning unlocked its stores in various profusion ; 
where the arts unfolded themselves in every form of beauty and 
grandeur ; where literature loved to linger in academic shades, or 
enjoy the public sunshine ; where song lent new inspiration to the 
temple ; where eloquence alternately consecrated the hall of legis- 
lation, or astonished the forum with its appeals. 

We may not assert, that the present age can lay claim to the 
production of any one of the mightiest efforts of human genius. 
Homer and Virgil, and Shakspeare and Milton, were of other days, 
and yet stand unrivalled in song. Time has not inscribed upon 
the sepulchre of the dead any nobler names in eloquence than 
Demosthenes and Cicero. Who has outdone the chisel of Phid- 
ias, or«the pencil of Michael Angelo and Raffaelle? Where are 
the monuments of our day whose architecture dares to contend 
with the Doric, Ionic or Corinthian of Greece, or even with the 
Composite or Gothic of later times ? History yet points to the 
pregnant though brief text of Tacitus, and acknowledges no finer 
models than those of antiquity. The stream of a century has 
swept by the works of Locke and Newton ; yet they still stand 
alone in unapproached, in unapproachable majesty. 

Nor may we pronounce that the present age, by its collective 
43 Sss 



506 



MR. STORY'S DISCOURSE 



splendor in arts and arms, easts into shade ail former epochs. The 
era of Pericles witnessed a combination of talents and acquirements, 
of celebrated deeds and celebrated works, which the lapse of 
twenty-two centuries has left unobscured. Augustus, surveying 
his mighty empire, could scarcely contemplate with more satisfac- 
tion the triumph of his arms, than the triumph of the philosophy 
and literature of Rome. France yet delights to dwell on the 
times of Louis the Fourteenth, as the proudest in her annals ; and 
England (with far less propriety) looks back upon the reign of 
queen Anne for the best models of her literary excellence. 

But, though we may not arrogate to ourselves the possession of 
the fint genius, or the first era, in human history, let it not be 
imagined that we do not live in an extraordinary age. It is impos- 
sible to look around us without alternate emotions of exultation 
and astonishment. What shall we say of one revolution which 
creat( d a nation out of thirteen feeble colonies, and founded the 
em pile of liberty upon the basis of the perfect equality in rights 
and representation of all its citizens ? — which commenced in a 
struggle, by enlightened men, for principles, and not for places, 
and, in its progress and conclusion, exhibited examples of heroism, 
patriotic sacrifices, and disinterested virtue, which have never been 
surpassed in the most favored regions? What shall we say of this 
nation, which has, in fifty years, quadrupled its population, and 
spread itself from the Atlantic to the Rocky mountains, not by the 
desolations of successful war, but by the triumphant march of 
industry and enterprise? What shall we say of another revolution, 
which shook Europe to its centre, overturned principalities and 
thrones, demolished oppressions whose iron had for ages entered 
into the souls of their subjects, and, after various fortunes of victory 
and defeat, of military despotism and popular commotion, ended at 
last in the planting of free institutions, free tenures, and representa- 
tive government, in the very soil of absolute monarchy? What 
shall we say of another revolution, or rather series of revolutions, 
which has restored to South America the independence torn from 
her, three centuries ago, by the force or by the fraud of those 
nations whose present visitations bespeak a Providence which su- 
perintends and measures out, at awful distances, its rewards and 
its retributions ? She has risen, as it were, from the depths % of the 
ocean, where she had been buried for as;es. Her shores no longer 
murmur with the hoarse surges of her unnavigated waters, or 
echo the jealous footsteps of her armed oppressors. Her forests 
and her table-lands, her mountains and her valleys, gladden with 
the voices of the free. She welcomes to her ports the whitening 
sails of commerce. She feels that the treasures of her mines, the 
broad expanse of her rivers, the beauty of her lakes, the grandeur 
of ner scenery, the products of her fertile and inexhaustible soil, 



AT CAMBRIDGE, J 826. 



507 



are no longer the close domain of a distant sovereign, but the free 
inheritance of her own children. She sees that these are to bind 
her to other nations by ties which outlive all compacts and all 
dynasties, — by ties of mutual sympathy, mutual equality, and mu- 
tual interest. 

But such events sink into nothing, compared with the great 
moral, political and literary revolutions by which they have been 
accompanied. Upon some of these topics I may not indulge 
myself even for a moment. They have been discussed here, and 
in other places, in a manner which forbids all hope of more com- 
prehensive illustration. They may, indeed, be still followed out ; 
but whoever dares the difficulties of such a task, will falter with 
unequal footsteps. 

What I propose to myself, on the present occasion, is of a fir 
more limited and humble nature. It is to trace out some of the 
circumstances of our age which connect themselves closely with 
the cause of science and letters ; to sketch, here and there, a light 
and shadow of our days ; to look somewhat at our own prospects 
and attainments; — and thus to lay before you something for reflec- 
tion, for encouragement, and for admonition. 

One of the most striking characteristics of our age, and that, 
indeed, which has worked deepest in all the changes of its for- 
tunes and pursuits, is the general diffusion of knowledge. This is 
emphatically the age of reading. In other times, this was the 
privilege of the few ; in ours, it is the possession of the many. 
Learning once constituted the accomplishment of those in the 
higher orders of society, who had no relish for active employment, 
and of those whose monastic lives and religious profession sought 
to escape from the weariness of their common duties. Its progress 
may be said to have been gradually downwards from the higher to 
the middle classes of society. It scarcely reached at all, in its 
joys or its sorrows, in its instructions or its fantasies, the home of 
the peasant and artisan. It now radiates in all directions, and 
exerts its central force more in the middle than in any other class 
of society. The means of education were formerly within the 
reach of few. It required wealth to accumulate knowledge. The 
possession of a library was no ordinary achievement. The learned 
leisure of a fellowship in some university seemed almost indispen 
sable for any successful studies ; and the patronage of princes and 
courtiers was the narrow avenue of public favor. I speak of a 
period at little more than the distance of two centuries ; not of 
particular instances, but of the general cast and complexion of life. 

The principal cause of this change is to be found in the freedom 
of the press, or rather in cooperating with the cheapness of the 
press. It has been aided, also, by the system of free schools 
wherever it has been established ; by that liberal commerce which 



508 



MR. STORY'S DISCOURSE 



connects, by golden chains, the interests of mankind ; ' by that spirit 
of inquiry which Protestantism awakened throughout Christian Eu- 
rope ; and, above all, by those necessities which have compelled 
even absolute monarchs to appeal to the patriotism and common 
sentiments of their subjects. Little more than a century has 
elapsed since the press, in England, was under the control of a 
licenser ; and within our own days only has it ceased to be a 
contempt, punishable by imprisonment, to print the debates of 
parliament. We all know how it still is on the continent of 
Europe. It either speaks in timid under-tones, or echoes back the 
prescribed formularies of the government. The moment publicity 
is given to affairs of state, they excite every where an irresistible 
interest. If discussion be permitted, it will soon be necessary to 
enlist talents to defend, as well as talents to devise, measures. 
The daily press first instructed men in their wants, and soon found 
that the eagerness of curiosity outstripped the power of gratifying 
it. No man can now doubt the fact, that wherever the press is 
free, it will emancipate the people; wherever knowledge circulates 
unrestrained, it is no longer safe to oppress; wherever public opinion 
is enlightened, it nourishes an independent, masculine and healthful 
spirit. If Faustus were now living, he might exclaim, with all the 
enthusiasm of Archimedes, and with a far nearer approach to the 
truth, Give me where I may place a free press, and I will shake 
the world. 

One interesting effect which owes its origin to this universal love 
and power of reading, is felt in the altered condition of authors 
themselves. They no longer depend upon the smiles of a favored 
few. The patronage of the great is no longer submissively entreat- 
ed or exultingly proclaimed. Their patrons are the public : their 
readers are the civilized world. They address themselves, not to 
the present generation alone, but aspire to instruct posterity. No 
blushing dedications seek an easy passport to fame, or flatter the 
perilous condescension of pride. No illuminated letters flourish 
on the silky page, asking admission to the courtly drawing-room. 
Authors are no longer the humble companions or dependants of 
the nobility ; but they constitute the chosen ornaments of society, 
and are welcomed to the gay circles of fashion and the palaces of 
princes. Theirs is no longer ah unthrifty vocation, closely allied 
to penury; but an elevated profession, maintaining its thousands 
in lucrative pursuits. It is not with them as it was in the days of 
Milton, whose immortal "Paradise I.-o^v." drew five sterling pounds, 
with a contingent of five more, from ths reluctant bookseller. 

My lord Coke would hardly find good {authority, in our day, for 
his provoking commentary on the memorable statute of the fourth 
Henry, which declares that c; none henceforth sfcal. 1 use to multiply 
gold or silver, or use the craft of multiplication v -in which he 



AT CAMBRIDGE, 1828. 



509 



gravely enumerates five classes of beggars, ending the catalogue, 
in his own quaint phraseology, with " poetasters," and repeating, 
for the benefit of young apprentices of the law, the sad admonition, 

" Saspe pater dixit, Studium, quid inutile tentas ? 
Mseonides nullas ipse reliquit opes." 

There are certainly among us those who are within the penalty 
of this prohibition, if my lord Coke's account of the matter is to 
be. believed; for they are in possession of what he defines to ba 
"a certain subtile and spiritual substance extracted out of things," 
whereby they transmute many things into gold. I am indeed 
afraid that the magician of Abbotsford is accustomed to "use the 
craft of multiplication;" and most of us know, to our cost, that he 
has changed many strange substances into very gold and very sil- 
ver. Yet, even if he be an old offender in this way, as is shrewdly 
suspected, there is little danger of his conviction in this liberal age, 
since, though he gains by every thing he parts with, we are never 
willing to part with any thing we receive from him. 

The rewards of authorship are almost as sure and regular now 
as those of any other profession. There are, indeed, instances of 
wonderful success and sad failure ; of genius pining in neglect ; of 
labor bringing nothing but sickness of the heart ; of fruitless enter- 
prise baffled in every adventure ; of learning waiting its appointed 
time to die in patient suffering. But this is the lot of some in 
all times. Disappointment crowds fast upon human footsteps, in 
whatever paths they tread. Eminent good fortune is a prize rare- 
ly given, even to the foremost in the race. And, after all, he who 
has read human life most closely knows that happiness is not the 
constant attendant of the highest public favor, and that it rather 
belongs to those who, if they seldom soar, seldom fall. 

Scarcely is a work of real merit dry from the English press, be- 
fore it wings its way to both the Indies and Americas. It is found 
in the most distant climates and the most sequestered retreats. It 
charms the traveller as he sails over rivers and oceans. It visits 
our lakes and our forests. It kindles the curiosity of the thick- 
breathing city, and cheers the log-hut of the mountaineer. The 
Lake of the Woods resounds with the minstrelsy of our mother- 
tongue, and the plains of Hindostan are tributary to its praise. 
Nay, more, what is the peculiar pride of our age, the Bible may 
now circulate its consolations and instructions among the poor and 
forlorn of every land in their native dialect. Such is the triumph 
of letters : such is the triumph of Christian benevolence. 

With such a demand for books, with such facilities of intercourse, 
it is no wonder that reading should cease to be a mere luxury, and 
should be classed among the necessaries of life. Authors may now, 
with a steady confidence, boast that they possess a hold on the 
43* 



510 



MR. STORY'S DISCOURSE 



human mind which grapples closer and mightier than all others. 
They may feel sure that every just sentiment, every enlightened 
opinion, every earnest breathing after excellence, will awaken kin- 
dred sympathies from the rising to the setting sun. 

Nor should it be overlooked what a beneficial impulse has been 
thus communicated to education among the female sex. If Chris- 
tianity may be said to have given a permanent elevation to woman, 
as an intellectual and moral being, it is as true that the present age, 
above all others, has given play to her genius, and taught us to 
reverence its influence. It was the fashion of other times- to treat 
the literary acquirements of the sex as starched pedantry or vain 
pretensions, — to stigmatize them as inconsistent with those domestic 
affections and virtues which constitute the charm of society. We 
had abundant homilies read upon their amiable weaknesses and 
sentimental delicacy, — upon their timid gentleness and submissive 
dependence ; as if to taste the fruit of knowledge were a deadly 
sin, and ignorance were the sole guardian of innocence. Their 
whole lives were " sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,'' 
and concealment of intellectual power was often resorted to, to 
escape the dangerous imputation of masculine strength. In the 
higher walks of life, the satirist was not without color for the sug- 
gestion, that it was 

" A youth of folly — an old age of cards ; " 

and that, elsewhere, "most women had no character at all" beyond 
that of purity and devotion to their families. Admirable as are 
these qualities, it seemed an abuse of the gifts of Providence to 
deny to mothers the power of instructing their children, — to wives 
the privilege of sharing the intellectual pursuits of their husbands, 
■ — to sisters and daughters the delight of ministering knowledge 
in the fireside circle, — to youth and beauty the charm of refined 
sense, — to age and infirmity the consolation of studies which elevate 
the soul and gladden the listless hour? of despondency. 

These things have, in a great measure, passed away. The pre- 
ludices which dishonored the sex have yielded to the influence of 
truth. By slow but sure advances education has extended itself 
through all ranks of female society. There is no longer any dread 
lest the culture of science should foster that masculine boldness or 
restless independence, which alarms by its sallies or wounds by its 
inconsistencies. We have seen that here, as every where else, 
knowledge is favorable to human virtue and human happiness ; that 
the refinement of literature adds lustre to the devotion of piety ; 
that true learning, like true taste, is modest and unostentatious; that 
grace of manners receives a higher polish from the discipline of the 
schools ; that cultivated genius sheds a cheering light over domes- 
tic duties, and its very sparkles, like those of the diamond, attest 



AT CAMBRIDGE, 1826. 511 



at once its power and its purity. There is not a rank of female 
society, however high, which does not pay homage to literature, 
or that would not blush even at the suspicion of that ignorance 
which, a half-century ago, was neither uncommon nor discreditable. 
There is not a parent whose pride may not glow at the thought 
that his daughter's happiness is, in a great measure, within her 
own command, whether she keeps the cool, sequestered vale of 
life, or visits the busy walks of fashion. 

A new path is thus open for female exertion, to alleviate the 
pressure of misfortune, without any supposed sacrifice of dignity or 
modesty. Man no longer aspires to an exclusive 'dominion in 
authorship. He has rivals or allies in almost every department 
of knowledge ; and they are to be found among those whose 
elegance of manners and blamelessness of life command his re- 
spect, as much as their talents excite his admiration. Who is 
there that does not contemplate with enthusiasm the precious frag- 
ments of Elizabeth Smith, the venerable learning of Elizabeth 
Carter, the elevated piety of Hannah More, the persuasive sense 
of Mrs. Barbauld, the elegant memoirs of her accomplished niece, 
the bewitching fictions of Madame D'Arblay, the vivid, picturesque 
and terrific imagery of Mrs. Radcliffe, the glowing poetry of Mrs. 
Hemans, the matchless wit, the inexhaustible conversations, the 
fine character-painting, the practical instructions of Miss Edge- 
worth, the great known, standing, in her own department, by the 
side of the great unknown ? 

Another circumstance illustrative of the character of our age, is 
the bold and fearless spirit of its speculations. Nothing is more 
common, in the history of mankind, than a servile adoption of 
received opinions, and a timid acquiescence in whatever is estab- 
lished. It matters not whether a doctrine or institution owes its 
existence to accident or design, to wisdom, or ignorance, or folly ; 
there is a natural tendency to give it an undue value in proportion 
to its antiquity. What is obscure in its origin warms and gratifies 
the imagination. What in its progress has insinuated itself into 
the general habits and manners of a nation, becomes imbedded in 
the solid mass of society. It is only at distant intervals, from an 
aggregation of causes, that some stirring revolution breaks up the 
old foundations, or some mighty genius storms and overthrows the 
intrenchments, of error. Who would believe, if history did not 
record the fact, that the metaphysics of Aristotle, or rather the mis- 
use of his metaphysics, held the human mind in bondage for two 
thousand years ? — that Galileo was imprisoned for proclaiming the 
true theory of the solar system? — that the magnificent discoveries of 
Sir Isaac Newton encountered strong opposition from philosophers ? 
— that Locke's Essay on the Human Understanding found its way 
with infinite difficulty into the studies of the English universities ?- 



512 



MR. STORY'S DISCOURSE 



that lord Bacon's method of induction never reached its splendid 
triumphs until our day ? — that the doctrine of the divine right of 
kings, and the absolute allegiance of subjects, constituted nearly the 
whole theory of government from the fall of the Roman republic 
to the seventeenth century ? — that Christianity itself was overlaid 
and almost buried, for many centuries, by the dreamy comments 
of monks, the superstitions of fanatics, and the traditions of the 
church ? — that it was an execrable sin throughout Christendom to 
read and circulate the Holy Scriptures in the vulgar tongue ? — 
nay, that it is still a crime in some nations, of which the inqui- 
sition would take no very indulgent notice, even if the head of the 
Catholic church should not feel, that Bible societies deserve his 
denunciation ? Even the great reformers of the Protestant church 
left their work but half done, or rather came to it with notions far 
too limited for its successful accomplishment. They combated 
errors and abuses, and laid the broad foundations of a more rational 
faith. But they were themselves insensible to the just rights and 
obligations of religious inquiry. They thought all error intolerable ; 
but they forgot, in their zeal, that the question, what was truth, 
was open to all for discussion. They assumed to themselves the 
very infallibility which they rebuked in the Romish church ; and 
as unrelentingly persecuted heresies of opinion as those who had 
sat for ages in the judgment-seat of St. Peter. They allowed, 
indeed, that all men had a right to inquire ; but they thought that 
all must, if honest, come to the same conclusion with themselves ; 
that the full extent of Christian liberty was the liberty of adopting 
those opinions which they promulgated as true. The unrestrained 
right of private judgment, the glorious privilege of a free conscience, 
as now established in this favored land, w T as farther from their 
thoughts even than Popery itself. I would not be unjust to these 
great men. The fault was less theirs than that of the age in which 
they lived. They partook only of that spirit of infirmity which 
religion itself may not wholly extinguish in its sincere but over- 
zealous votaries. It is their glory to have laid the deep, and, I 
trust, the imperishable foundations of Protestantism. May it be 
ours to finish the work as they would have done it, if they had been 
permitted to enjoy the blessed light of these latter times. But let 
not Protestants boast of their justice or their charity while they 
continue to deny an equality of rights to the Catholics. 

The progress of the spirit of free inquiry cannot escape the ob- 
servation of the most superficial examiner of history. The press, 
by slow but firm steps, first felt its way, and began its attacks upon 
the outworks of received opinions. One error after another silently 
crumbled into the dust, until success seemed to justify the boldest 
eyperiments. Opinions in science, in physic, in philosophy, in 
morals, in religion, in literature, have been subjected to the severest 



AT CAMBRIDGE, 1826. 



513 



scrutiny ; and many, which had grown hoary under the authority 
of ages, have been quietly conveyed to their last home with scarcely 
a solitary mourner to grace their obsequies. The contest, indeed, 
between old and new opinions has been, and continues to be, 
maintained with great obstinacy and ability on all sides, and has 
forced even the sluggish into the necessity of thinking for them- 
selves. Scholars have been driven to arm themselves for attack 
as well as for defence ; and in a literary warfare, nearly universal, 
have been obliged to make their appeals to the living judgment of 
the public for protection as well as for encouragement. 

The effects of this animated and free discussion have, in general, 
been very salutary. There is not a single department of life which 
has not been invigorated by its influence, nor a single profession 
which has not partaken of its success. 

In jurisprudence, which reluctantly admits any new adjunct, and 
counts in its train a thousand champions ready to rise in defence 
of its formularies and technical rules, the victory has been brilliant 
and decisive. The civil and the common law have yielded to the 
pressure of the times, and have adopted much which philosophy 
and experience have recommended, although it stood upon no text 
of the Pandects, and claimed no support from the feudal policy. 
Commercial law, at least so far as England and America are con- 
cerned, is the creation of the eighteenth century. It started into 
life with the genius of lord Mansfield, and, gathering in its course 
whatever was valuable in the earlier institutes of foreign countries, 
has reflected back upon them its own superior lights, so as to 
become the guide and oracle of the commercial world. If my own 
feelings do not mislead me, the profession itself has also acquired 
a liberality of opinion, a comprehensiveness of argumentation, a 
sympathy with the other pursuits of life, and a lofty eloquence, 
which, if ever before, belonged to it only in the best days of the 
best orators of antiquity. It was the bitter scoff of other times, 
approaching to the sententiousness of a proverb, that to be a good 
lawyer was to be an indifferent statesman. The profession has 
uutlived the truth of the sarcasm. At the present moment Eng- 
land may count lawyers among her most gifted statesmen ; and in 
America (I need but appeal to those who hear me for the fact) our 
most eminent statesmen have been — nay, still are — the brightest 
ornaments of our bar. 

The same improving spirit has infused itself into the body of 
legislation and political economy. I may not adventure upon this 
extensive topic. But I would for a moment advert to the more 
benignant character manifested in the criminal law. Harsh and 
vindictive punishments have been discountenanced or abolished. 
The sanguinary codes, over which humanity wept and philosophy 
shuddered, have felt the potent energy of reform, and substituted 

Ttt 



514 



MR. STORE'S DISCOURSE 



for agonizing terror the gentle spirit of mercy. America has taken 
the lead in this glorious march of philanthropy, under the banners 
of that meek sect which does good by stealth, and blushes to find 
it fame. There is not in the code of the Union, and probably not 
in that of any single state, more than ten crimes to which the 
sober judgment of legislation now affixes the punishment of death. 
England, indeed, counts in her bloody catalogue more than one 
hundred and sixty capital offences. But the dawn of a brighter 
day is opening upon her. After years of doubtful struggle, the 
meliorations suggested by the lamented sir Samuel Romilly have 
forced their way through parliament to the throne ; and an enlight- 
ened ministry is redeeming her from this reproach upon her national 
character. 

In medicine, throughout all its branches, more extraordinary 
changes have taken place. Here, indeed, inductive philosophy 
looks for some of its fairest trophies. In anatomy, in physiology, 
in pharmacy, in therapeutics, instructed skill, patient observation, 
and accurate deduction, have been substituted for vague conjecture 
and bold pretension. Instead of mystical compounds, and nos- 
trums, and panaceas, science has introduced its powerful simples, 
and thus given energy and certainty to practice. We dream no 
longer over the favorite theories of the art succeeding each other 
in endless progression. We are content to adopt a truer course ; 
to read nature in her operations ; to compel her to give up her 
secrets to the expostulations of her ministers, and to answer the 
persevering interrogatories of her worshippers. Chemistry, by its 
brilliant discoveries and careful analysis, has unfolded laws which 
surprise us by their simplicity, as well as by the extent of their 
operations. By its magic touch the very elements of things seem 
decomposed, and to stand in disimbodied essences before us. 

In theology a new era has commenced. From the days cf 
Grotius almost to our own, a sluggish indifference to critical learning 
fastened upon most of those who administered the high solemnities 
of religion. Here and there, indeed, a noble spirit was seen, like Old 
Mortality, wiping away the ancient dust and retracing the fading lines, 
and, in his zeal for truth, undergoing almost a martyrdom. But the 
mass of professed theologians slumbered over the received text in 
easy security, or poured the distillations of one commentary into an- 
other, giving little improvement to the flavor, and none to the sub- 
stance. They were, at length, roused by a spirit of another sort, 
which, by ridicule, or argument, or denunciation of abuses, was at- 
tempting to sap the very foundations of Christianity. It made its 
approaches in silence, until it had attained strength enough for an 
open assault ; and at last, in a moment of political revolution, it erected 
the standard of infidelity in the veiy centre of Christendom. Fortu- 
nately^ the critical studies of the scholars of the old world enabled 



AT CAMBRIDGE, 1826. 



515 



them to meet the difficulties of the occasion. The immense colla- 
tions of manuscripts and various readings by such men as Mills, and 
Werstein, and Kennicott, prepared the way for a more profound 
investigation of the genuineness and authenticity of the Scriptures. 
And the sober sense and unwearied diligence of our age have given 
to the principles of interpretation an accuracy and authority, to 
biblical researches a dignity and certainty, to practical as well as 
doctrinal theology, a logic and illustration, unparalleled in the annals 
of the church. If Christianity has been assailed, in our day, with 
uncommon ability, it has never been defended with more various 
learning. If it has surrendered, here and there, an interpolated 
passage, it has placed almost beyond the reach of doubt the general 
integrity of the text. If it has ceased, in some favored lands, to 
claim the civil arm for its protection, it has established itself in the 
hearts of men by all which genius could bring to illumine, or 
eloquence to grace, its sublime truths. 

In pure mathematics and physical science there has been a cor- 
respondent .advancement. The discoveries of Newton have been 
followed out and demonstrated, by new methods and analyses, to 
an extent which would surprise that great philosopher himself, if 
he were now living. I need but name such men as La Grange 
and La Place. By means of observations the heavens have been, 
if I may so say, circumnavigated, and every irregularity and pertur- 
bation of the motions of the heavenly bodies ascertained to depend 
upon the same eternal law of gravitation, and to result in the har- 
monious balance of forces. But it is in physical science, and 
especially in its adaptation to arts of life, that the present age 
may claim precedence of all others. I have already alluded to 
chemistry, w r hich has enabled us to fix and discharge colors with 
equal certainty ; now to imitate the whiteness of the driven snow, 
and now the loveliness of the Tyrian dyes. But who can measure 
the extent of the changes in agriculture, manufactures, and com- 
merce, produced by the steam-engine of Watt, by the cotton 
machinery of Arkwright, by the power-looms of a later period, by 
the cotton-gin of Whitney, and (though last, not least) by the 
steam-boat of Fulton ? When I name these, I select but a tew 
among the inventions of our age in which nature and art minister 
alternately to the wants and the triumphs of man. 

If in metaphysics no brilliant discoveries have rewarded tht-. 
industry of its votaries, it may, nevertheless, be said that the laws 
of the mind have been investigated with no common success. They 
have been illustrated by a fuller display of the doctrine of asso- 
ciation of Hartley, by the common sense of Reid, by the acute 
discrimination of Brown, and by the incomparable elegance of 
Dugald Stewart. If, indeed, in this direction any new discoveries 
are to be expected, it appears to me (with great deference) that 



516 



MR. STORY'S DISCOURSE 



they must be sought through more exact researches into that 
branch of physiology which respects the structure and functions of 
those organs which are immediately connected with the operations 
of the mind. 

I have but glanced at most of the preceding subjects, many of 
which are remote from the studies which have engaged my life, 
and to all of which I am conscious that I am unable to do even 
moderate justice. 

But it is to the department of general and miscellaneous litera- 
ture, and, above all, of English literature, that we may look with 
pride and confidence. Here the genius of the age has displayed 
itself in innumerable varieties of form and beauty, from the humble 
page which presumes to teach the infant mind the first lines of 
thought, to the lofty works which discourse of history, and philos- 
ophy, and ethics, and government ; from the voyager who collects 
his budget of wonders for the amusement of the idle, to the gallant 
adventurer to the pole, and the scientific traveller on the Andes. 
Poetry, too, has dealt out its enchantments with profuse liberality, 
— now startling us with its visionary horrors and superhuman pa- 
geants, — now scorching us with its fierce and caustic satire, — now 
lapping us in Elysium by the side of sunny shores, or lovely lakes, 
or haunted groves, or consecrated ruins. It is, indeed, no exagge- 
ration of .the truth to declare that polite literature, from the light 
essay to the most profound disquisition, can enumerate more ex- 
cellent works, as the production of the last fifty years, than of all 
former ages since the revival of letters. 

Periodical literature has elevated itself from an amusement of 
cultivated minds, or a last resort of impoverished authors, to the 
first rank of composition, in which the proudest are not ashamed 
to labor, and the highest may gain fame and consequence. A 
half-century ago a single magazine and a single review almost 
sufficed the whole reading public of England and America. At 
present a host crowd round us, from the gossamery repository 
which adorns the toilet, to the grave review which discusses the 
fate of empires, arraigns the counsels of statesmen, expounds all 
mysteries in policy and science, or, stooping from such pursuits, 
condescends, like other absolute powers, sometimes to crush an 
author to death, and sometimes to elevate him to a height where 
he faints from the mere sense of giddiness. We have our journals 
of science and journals of arts, — the New Monthly with the refresh- 
ing genius of Campbell, and the Old Monthly with the compan- 
ionable qualities of a familiar friend. We have the Quarterly 
Reviewers, — the loyal defenders of church and state, the luudatores 
temporis acti, the champions, ay, and exemplars, too, of classical 
'earning, the admirers of ancient establishments and ancient opin- 
nns. We have, on the other hand, the Edinburgh,— the bold 



AT CAMBRIDGE, 1826. 



517 



advocates of reform, and still bolder political economists, hunting 
out public abuses and alarming idle gentlemen-pensioners with 
tales of misapplied charities ; now deriding, with bitter taunts, the 
dull but busy gleaners in literature ; now brightening their pages 
with the sunshine of wit ; and now paying homage to genius by 
expounding its labors in language of transcendent felicity. One 
might approach nearer home, and, if it were not dangerous to 
rouse the attention of critics, might tell of a certain North Amer- 
ican, which has done as much to give a solid cast to our literature, 
and a national feeling to our authors, as any single event since the 
peace of 1783. 

Another interesting accompaniment of the literature of the age, 
is its superior moral purity over former productions. The obscene 
jests, the low ribaldry, and the coarse allusions, which shed a dis- 
astrous light on so many pages of misguided genius in former times, 
find no sympathy in ours. He who would now command respect 
must write with pure sentiments and elevated feelings. He who 
would now please must be chaste as well as witty, and moral as 
well as brilliant. Fiction itself is restrained ' to the decencies of 
life ; and whether in the drama, or the novel, or the song, with 
a few melancholy exceptions, it seeks no longer to kindle fires 
which would consume the youthful enthusiast, or to instil precepts 
which would blast the loveliness of the innocent. 

But let it not be imagined that, in the present state of things, 
there is nothing for regret and nothing for admonition. The 
picture of the age, when truly drawn, is not wholly composed of 
lights. There are shades which disturb the beauty of the coloring, 
and points of reflection where there is no longer harmony in the 
proportions. 

The unavoidable tendency of free speculation is to lead to occa- 
sional extravagances. When once the reverence for authority is 
shaken, there is apt to grow up, in its stead, a cold skepticism 
respecting established opinions. Their very antiquity, under such 
circumstances, betrays us into suspicion of their truth. The over- 
throw of error itself urges on a feverish excitement for discussion, 
and a restless desire for novelty, which blind, if they do not con- 
found, the judgment. Thus the human mind not unfrequently 
passes from one extreme to another, — from one of implicit faith to 
one of absolute incredulity. 

There is not a remark, deducible from the history of mankind, 
more important than that advanced by Mr. Burke, that " to inno- 
vate is not to reform." That is (if I may venture to follow out 
the sense of this great man), that innovation is not necessarily 
improvement ; that novelty is not necessarily excellence ; that 
what was deemed wisdom in former times is not necessarily folly 
in ours ; that the course of the human mind has not been to pre- 
44 



513 



MR. STORY'S DISCOURSE 



sent a multitude of truths in one great step of its glory, but to 
gather them up insensibly in its progress, and to place them at 
distances — sometimes at vast distances — as guides or warnings to 
succeeding ages. If Greece and Rome did not solve all the 
problems of civil government, or enunciate the admirable theorem 
of representative legislation, it should never be forgotten that from 
them we have learned those principles of liberty, which, in the 
worst of times, have consoled the patriot for all his sufferings. If 
they cannot boast of the various attainments of our days, they may 
point out to us the lessons of wisdom, the noble discoveries and the 
imperishable labors of their mighty dead. It is not necessarily 
error to follow the footsteps of ancient philosophy, to reverence 
the precepts of ancient criticism, to meditate over the pages of 
ancient exploits, or to listen to the admonitions of ancient oratory. 

We may even gather instruction from periods of another sort, 
in which there was a darkness which might be felt as well as seen. 
Where is to be found a nobler institution than the trial by jury, — 
that impregnable bulwark of civil liberty? Yet it belongs to ages 
of Gothic darkness or Saxon barbarism. Where is there a more 
enduring monument of political wisdom than the separation of the 
judicial from legislative powers ? Yet it was the slow production 
of ages which are obscured by the mists of time. Where shall we 
point out an invention whose effects have been more wide or more 
splendid than those of the mariner's compass ? Yet five centuries 
have rolled over the grave of its celebrated discoverer. Where 
shall we find the true logic of physical science so admirably stated, 
as in the Novum Organum of him who, more than two centuries 
ago, saw, as in vision, and foretold, as in prophecy, the sublime 
discoveries of these latter days ? 

This is a topic which may not wholly be passed over, since it 
presents some of the dangers to which we are exposed, and calls 
upon us to watch the progress of opinion, and guard against the 
seductive influence of novelties. The busy character of the age 
is perpetually pressing forward all sorts of objections to established 
truths in politics, and morals, and literature. In order to escape 
from the imputation of triteness, some authors tax their ingenuity 
to surprise us with bold paradoxes, or run down, with wit and rid- 
icule, the doctrines of common sense, appealing sometimes to the 
ignorance and sometimes to the pride of their readers. Their 
object is not so much to produce what is true as what is striking, 
— w T hat is profound, as what is interesting, — what will endure 
the test of future criticism, as what will buoy itself up on the 
current of a shallow popularity. In the rage for originality the old 
standards of taste are deserted or treated with cold indifference ; 
and thus false and glittering thoughts, and hurried and flippant 
■ antasies, are substituted for exact and philosophical reasoning. 



AT CAMBRIDGE, 1826. 



519 



There is, too, a growing propensity to disparage the importance 
of classical learning. Many causes, especially in England and 
America, have conduced to this result. The signal success which 
has followed the enterprises in physical science, in mechanics, in 
chemistry, in civil engineering, and the ample rewards, both of 
fortune and fame, attendant upon that success, have had a very 
powerful influence upon the best talents of both countries. There 
is, too, in the public mind a strong disposition to turn every thing 
to a practical account, — to deal less with learning and more with 
experiment, — to seek the solid comforts of -opulence, rather than the 
indulgence of mere intellectual luxury. On the other hand, from 
the increase of materials as well as of critical skill, high scholarship 
is a prize of no easy attainment ; and, when attained, it slowly 
receives public favor, and still more slowly reaches the certainty 
of wealth. Indeed, it is often combined with a contemplative 
shyness and sense of personal independence, which yield little to 
policy and with difficulty brook opposition. The honors of the 
world rarely cluster round it, and it cherishes, with most enthu- 
siasm, those feelings which the active pursuits of life necessarily 
impair, if they do not wholly extinguish. The devotion to it, 
therefore, where it exists, often becomes our exclusive passion ; 
and thus the gratification of it becomes the end, instead of the 
means, of life. Instances of extraordinary success, by mere schol- 
arship, are more rare than in other professions. It is not, then, to 
be wondered at, that the prudence of some minds, and the ambition 
of others, should shrink from labors which demand days and nights 
of study, and hold out rewards which are distant, or pleasures 
which are, for the most part, purely intellectual. 

Causes like these, in an age which scrutinizes and questions 
the pretensions of every department of literature, have contributed 
to bring into discussion the use and the value of classical learning. 
I do not stand up, on this occasion, to vindicate its claims or extol 
its merits. That would be a fit theme for one of our most distin- 
guished scholars, in a large discourse. But I may not withhold 
my willing testimony to its excellence, nor forget the fond regret 
with which I left its enticing studies for the discipline of more 
severe instructors. 

The importance of classical learning to professional education is 
so obvious, that the surprise is that it could ever have become 
matter of disputation. I speak not of its power in refining the 
taste, in disciplining the judgment, in invigorating the understand- 
ing, or in warming the heart with elevated sentiments ; but of its 
power of direct, positive, necessary instruction. Until the eigh- 
teenth century, the mass of science, in its principal branches, was 
deposited in the dead languages, and much of it still reposes there. 
To be ignorant of these languages is to shut out the lights of for- 



520 



MR. STORY'S DISCOURSE 



mer times, or to examine them only through the glimmerings ot 
inadequate translations. What should we say of the jurist who 
never aspired to learn the maxims of law and equity which adorn 
the Roman codes? What of the physician who could deliberately 
surrender all the knowledge heaped up, for so many centuries, in 
the Latinity of continental Europe ? What of the minister of 
religion who should choose not to study the Scriptures in the 
original tongue, and should be content to trust his faith and his 
hopes, for time and for eternity, to the dimness of translations 
which may reflect the literal import, but rarely can reflect, with 
unbroken force, the beautiful spirit of the text ? Shall he, whose 
vocation it is "to allure to brighter worlds and lead the way," be 
himself the blind leader of the blind ? Shall he follow the com- 
mentaries of fallible man, instead of gathering the true sense from 
the Gospels themselves? Shall he venture upon the exposition of 
divine truths whose studies have never aimed at the first principles 
of interpretation ? Shall he proclaim the doctrines of salvation, 
who knows not and cares not whether he preaches an idle gloss or 
the genuine text of revelation ? If a theologian may not pass his 
life in collating the various readings, he may and ought to aspire 
to that criticism which illustrates religion by all the resources of 
human learning ; which studies the manners and institutions of 
the age and country in which Christianity was first promulgated ; 
which kindles an enthusiasm for its precepts by familiarity with 
the persuasive language of Him who poured out his blessings on 
the mount, and of Him at whose impressive appeal Felix trembled. 

I pass over all consideration of the written treasures of antiquity 
which have survived the wreck of empires and dynasties ; of mon- 
umental trophies and triumphal arches ; of palaces of princes and 
temples of the gods. I pass over all consideration of those admired 
compositions in which wisdom speaks as with a voice from heaven; 
of those sublime efforts of poetical genius which still freshen, as 
they pass from age to age, in undying vigor; of those finished histo- 
ries which still enlighten and instruct governments in their duty and 
their destiny ; of those matchless orations which roused nations 
to arms and chained senates to the chariot-wheels of all-conquering 
eloquence. These all may now be read in our vernacular tongue. 
Ay, as one remembers the face of a dead friend by gathering up 
the broken fragments of his image ; — as one listens to the tale of 
a dream twice told ; — as one catches the roar of the ocean in the 
ripple of a rivulet ; — as one sees the blaze of noon in the first 
glimmer of twilight. 

There is one objection, however, on which I would for a mo- 
ment dwell, because it has a commanding influence over many 
minds, and is clothed with a specious importance. It is often said 
that there have been eminent men and eminent writers to whom 



AT CAMBRIDGE. 1826. 521 



the ancient languages were unknown, — men who have risen by the 
force of their talents, and writers who have written with a purity 
and ease which hold them up as models for imitation. On the 
other hand, it is as often said that scholars do not always compose 
either with elegance or chasteness ; that their diction is sometimes 
loose and harsh, and sometimes ponderous and affected. Be it so. 
I am not disposed to call in question the accuracy of either state- 
ment. But I would, nevertheless, say that the presence of classical 
learning was not the cause of the faults of the one class, nor the 
absence of it the cause of the excellence of the other. And I 
would put this fact, as an answer to all such reasonings, that there 
is not a single language of modern Europe, in which literature has 
made any considerable advances, which is not directly of Roman 
origin, or has not incorporated into its very structure many, very 
many, of the idioms and peculiarities of the ancient tongues. The 
English language affords a strong illustration of the truth of this 
remark. It abounds with words and meanings drawn from classical 
sources. Innumerable phrases retain the symmetry of their ancient 
dress. Innumerable expressions have received their vivid tints from 
the beautiful dyes of Roman and Grecian roots. If scholars, there- 
fore, do not write our language with ease, or purity, or elegance, 
the cause must lie somewhat deeper than a conjectural ignorance 
of its true diction. 

But I am prepared to yield still more to the force of the objec- 
tion. I do not deny that a language may be built up without the 
aid of any foreign materials, and be at once flexible for speech and 
graceful for composition ; that the literature of a nation may be 
splendid and instructive, full of interest and beauty in thought and 
in diction, which has no kindred with classical learning; that, in the 
vast stream of time, it may run its own current unstained by the 
admixture of surrounding languages ; that it may realize the ancient 
fable, "Doris amara suam non intermisccat undam;" that it may 
retain its own flavor, and its own bitter saltness too. But I do deny 
that such a national literature does in fact exist, in modern Europe, in 
that community of nations of which we form a part, and to whose 
fortunes and pursuits in literature and arts we are bound by all our 
habits, and feelings, and interests. There is not a single nation 
from the north to the south of Europe, from the bleak shores of 
the Baltic to the bright plains of immortal Italy, whose literature 
is not imbedded in the very elements of classical learning. The 
literature of England is, in an emphatic sense, the production of 
her scholars, — of men who have cultivated letters in her univer- 
sities, and colleges, and grammar-schools, — of men who thought 
any life too short, chiefly because it left some relic of antiquity 
unmastered, and any other fame humble, because it faded in the 
presence of Roman and Grecian genius. He who studies English 
44* Uuu 



522 



MR. STORY'S DISCOURSE 



literature without the lights of classical learning, loses half the 
charms of its sentiments and style, of its force and feelings, of its 
delicate touches, of its delightful allusions, of its illustrative associa- 
tions. Who that reads the poetry of Gray does not feel- that it is 
the refinement of classical taste which gives such inexpressible 
vividness and transparency to his diction ? Who that reads the 
concentrated sense and melodious versification of Dry den and 
Pope, does not perceive in them the disciples of the old school, 
whose genius was inflamed by the heroic verse, the terse satire, 
and the playful wit of antiquity ? Who that meditates over the 
strains of Milton does not feel that he drank deep 

At " Siloa's brook, that flowed 

Fast by the oracle of God ;" 

that the fires of his magnificent mind were lighted by coals from 
ancient altars ? 

It is no exaggeration to declare^ that he who proposes to abolish 
classical studies proposes to render, in a great measure, inert and 
unedifying the mass of English literature for three centuries ; to 
rob us of much of the glory of the past, and much of the instruc- 
tion of future ages; to biind us to excellences which few may hope 
to equal, and none to surpass ; to annihilate associations which are 
interwoven with our best sentiments, and give to distant times and 
countries a presence and reality as if they were, in fact, our own. 

There are dangers of another sort which beset the literature of 
the age. The constant demand for new works, and the impatience 
for fame, not only stimulate authors to an undue eagerness for 
strange incidents, singular opinions, and vain sentimentalities, but 
their style and diction are infected with the faults of extravagance 
and affectation. The old models of fine writing and good taste are 
departed from, not because they can be excelled, but because they 
are known and want freshness ; because, if they have a finished 
coloring, they have no strong contrasts to produce effect. The 
consequence is, that opposite extremes in the manner of compo- 
sition prevail at the same moment, or succeed each other with a 
fearful rapidity. On one side are to be found authors who pro- 
fess to admire the easy flow and simplicity of the old style, — the 
naturalness of familiar prose, and the tranquil dignity of higher 
compositions- But in their desire to be simple, they become 
extravagantly loose and inartificial ; in their familiarity, feeble and 
drivelling ; and in their more aspiring efforts, cold, abstract, and 
harsh. On the other side, there are those who have no love for 
polished perfection of style, — for sustained and unimpassioned ac- 
curacy, — for persuasive, but equable diction. They require more 
hurried tones, more stirring spirit, more glowing and irregular 
sentences. There must be intensity of thought and intensity of 



AT CAMBRIDGE, 1826. 



523 



phrase at every turn. There must be bold and abrupt transitions, 
strong relief, vivid coloring, forcible expression. If these are 
present, all other faults are forgiven or forgotten. Excitement 
is produced, and taste may slumber. 

Examples of each sort may be easily found, in our miscellane- 
ous literature, among minds of no ordinary cast. Our poetry deals 
less than formerly with the sentiments and feelings belonging to 
ordinary life. It has almost ceased to be didactic, and, in its 
scenery and descriptions, reflects too much the peculiarities and 
morbid visions of eccentric minds. How little do we see of the 
simple beauty, the chaste painting, the unconscious moral gran- 
deur of Crabbe and Cowper ! We have, indeed, successfully 
dethroned the heathen deities. The Muses are no longer invoked 
by every unhappy inditer of verse. The Naiads no longer inhabit 
our fountains, nor the Dryads our woods. The river gods no 
longer rise, like old father Thames, 

" And the hushed waves glide softly to the shore." 

In these respects our poetry is more true to nature, and more 
conformable to just taste. But it still insists too much on extrava- 
gant events, characters, and passions, far removed from common 
life, and farther removed from general sympathy. It seeks to be 
wild, and fiery, and startling ; and sometimes, in its caprices, low 
and childish. It portrays natural scenery as if it were always in 
violent commotion. It describes human emotions as if man were 
always in ecstasies or horrors. Whoever writes for future ages 
must found himself upon feelings and sentiments belonging to the 
mass of mankind. Whoever paints from nature will rarely depart 
from the general character of repose impressed upon her scenery, 
and will prefer truth to the ideal sketches of the imagination. 

Our prose, too, has a tendency to become somewhat too ambi- 
tious and intense. Even in newspaper discussions of the merits 
or misdeeds of rulers, there is a secret dread of neglect, unless the 
page gives out the sententious pungency or sarcastic scorn of 
Junius. Familiar, idiomatic prose seems less attractive than in 
former times. Yet one would suppose that we might follow with 
safety the unaffected purity of Addison in criticism, and the grace- 
ful ease of Goldsmith in narrative. The neat and lively style of 
Swift loses nothing of its force by the simplicity with which it 
aims to put " proper words in proper places." The correspond 
ence of Cowper is not less engaging because it utters no cant 
phrases, no sparkling conceits, and no pointed repartees. 

But these faults may be considered as temporary, and are far 
from universal. There is another, however, which is more seri- 
ous and important in its character, and is the common accompani- 
ment pf success. It is the strong temptation of distinguished authors 



524 



MR. STORY'S DISCOURSE 



to premature publication of their labors, to hasty and unfinished 
sketches, to fervid but unequal efforts. He who writes for immor- 
tality, must write slowly, and correct freely. It is not the applause 
of the present day, or the deep interest of a temporary topic, or 
the consciousness of great powers, or the striking off of a vigor- 
ous discourse, which will ensure a favorable verdict from poster- 
ity. It was a beautiful remark of sir Joshua Reynolds, " that great 
works, which are to live, and stand the criticism of posterity, are 
not performed at a heat." " I remember," said he, " when I was 
at Rome, looking at the fighting gladiator, in company with an 
eminent sculptor, and I expressed my admiration of the skill with 
which the whole is composed, and the minute attention of the 
artist to the change of every muscle in that momentary exertion 
of strength. He was of opinion, that a work so perfect required 
nearly the whole life of man to perform." What an admonition ! 
What a melancholy reflection to those who deem the literary fame 
of the present age the best gift to posterity ! How many of our 
proudest geniuses have written, and continue to write, with a 
swiftness which almost rivals the operations of the press ! How 
many are urged on to the ruin of their immortal hopes by that 
public favor which receives with acclamations every new off- 
spring of their pen ! If Milton had written thus, we should have 
found no scholar of our day, no " Christian Examiner," portraying 
the glory of his character with the enthusiasm of a kindred spirit. 
If Pope had written thus, we should have had no fierce contests 
respecting his genius and poetical attainments by our Byrons, and 
Bowleses, and Roscoes. If Virgil had written thus, he might 
have chanted his verses to the courtly Augustus ; but Marcellus 
and his story would have perished. If Horace had written thus, 
he might have enchanted gay friends and social parties ; but it 
would never have been said of his composition, Decies repetita 
placebit. 

Such are some of the considerations which have appeared to 
me fit to be addressed to you on the present occasion. It may be 
that I have overrated their importance ; and I am not unconscious 
of the imperfections of my own execution of the task. 

To us, Americans, nothing, indeed, can, or ought to be indiffer- 
ent, that respects the cause of science and literature. We have 
taken a stand among the nations of the earth, and have success- 
fully asserted our claim to political equality. We possess an 
enviable elevation, so far as concerns the structure of our govern- 
ment, our political policy, and the moral energy of our institutions, 
If we are not without rivals in these respects, we are scarcely be- 
hind any, e^en in the general estimate of foreign nations them- 
selves. But our claims are far more extensive. We assert an 
squality of voice and vote in the republic of letters, and assume for 



AT CAMBRIDGE, 1826. 



525 



ourselves the right to decide on the merits of others, as well as to 
vindicate our own. These are lofty pretensions, which are never 
conceded without proofs, and are severely scrutinized, and slowly 
admitted -by the grave judges in the tribunal of letters. We have 
not placed ourselves as humble aspirants, seeking our way to 
higher rewards under the guardianship of experienced guides. We 
ask admission into the temple of fame, as joint heirs of the inher- 
itance, capable in the manhood of our strength of maintaining our 
title. We contend for prizes with nations whose intellectual glory 
has received the homage of centuries. France, Italy, Germany, 
England, can point to the past for monuments of their genius and 
skill, and to the present with the undismayed confidence of veter- 
ans. It is not for us to retire from the ground which we have 
chosen to occupy, nor to shut our eyes against the difficulties of 
maintaining it. It is not by a few vain boasts, or vainer self-com- 
placency, or rash daring, that we are to win our way to the first 
literary distinction. We must do as others have done before us. 
We must serve in the hard school of discipline ; we must invigo- 
rate our powers by the studies of other times. We must guide 
our footsteps by those stars which have shone, and still continue 
to shine, with inextinguishable light in the firmament" of learning. 
Nor have we any reason for despondency. There is that in 
American character which has never yet been found unequal to 
its purpose. There is that in American enterprise, which shrinks 
not, and faints not, and fails not in its labors. We may say with 
honest pride, 

" Man is the nobler growth our realms supply, 
And souls are ripened in our northern sky." 

We may not then shrink from a rigorous examination of our 
own deficiencies in science and literature. If we have but a just 
sense of our wants, we have gained half the victory. If we but 
face our difficulties, they will fly before us. Let us not discredit 
our just honors by exaggerating little attainments. There are 
those in other countries, who can keenly search out, and boldly 
expose every false pretension. There are those in our own country, 
who would scorn a reputation ill founded in fact, and ill sustained 
by examples. We have solid claims upon the affection and respect 
of mankind. Let us not jeopard them by a false shame, or an 
ostentatious pride. The growth of two hundred years is healthy, 
lofty, expansive. The roots have shot deep and far ; the branches 
are strong and broad. I trust that many, many centuries to come 
will witness the increase and vigor of the stock. Never, never 
may any of our posterity have just occasion to speak of our 
country in the expressiveness of Indian rhetoric — "It is an aged 
hemlock ; it is dead at the top." 



526 



MR. STORY'S DISCOURSE 



I repeat it, we have no reason to blush for what we have been, 
or what we are. But we shall have much to blush for, if, when 
the highest attainments of the human intellect are within our 
reach, we surrender ourselves to an obstinate indifference, or shal- 
low mediocrity ; if, in our literary career, we are content to rank 
behind the meanest principality of Europe. Let us not waste 
our time in seeking for apologies for our ignorance, where it exists, 
or in framing excuses to conceal it. Let our short reply to all 
such suggestions be, like the answer of a noble youth on another 
occasion, that we know the fact, and are every day getting the 
better of it. 

What, then, may I be permitted to ask, are our attainments in 
science and literature, in comparison with those of other nations in 
our age ? I do not ask, if we have fine scholars, accomplished 
divines, and skilful physicians. I do not ask, if we have lawyers 
who might excite a generous rivalry in Westminster Hall. I d( 
not ask, if we have statesmen, who would stand side by side with 
those of the old world in foresight, in political wisdom, in effective 
debate. I do not ask, if we have mathematicians, who may claim 
kindred with the distinguished of Europe. I do not ask, if we 
have historians, who have told, with fidelity and force, the story 
of our deeds and our sufferings. I do not ask, if we have critics* 
and poets, and philologists, whose compositions add lustre to the 
age. I know, full well that there are such. But they stand as 
light-houses on the coasts of our literature, shining with a cheering 
brightness, it is true, but too often at distressing distances. 

In almost every department of knowledge the land of our an- 
cestors annually pours forth from its press many volumes, the re- 
sults of deep research, of refined taste, and of rich and various 
learning. The continent of Europe, too, burns with a generous 
zeal for science, even in countries where the free exercise of 
thought is prohibited, and a stinted poverty presses heavily on the 
soul of enterprise. Our own contributions to literature are useful 
and creditable; but it can rarely be said that they belong to the 
highest class of intellectual effort. We have but recently entered 
upon classical learning for the purpose of cultivating its most pro- 
found studies, while Europe may boast of thousands of scholars 
engaged in this pursuit. The universities of Cambridge and Ox- 
ford count more than eight thousand students trimming their classi- 
cal lamps, while we have not a single university, whose studies 
profess to be extensive enough to educate a Heyne, a Bentley, a 
Porson, or a Parr. There is not, perhaps, a single library in 
America sufficiently copious to have enabled Gibbon to verify the 
authorities for his immortal History of the Decline and Fall of the 
Roman Empire. Our advances in divinity and law are probably 
as gieat as in any branch of knowledge. Yet, until a late period, 



AT CAMBRIDGE, 1826. 



527 



we never aspired to a deep and critical exposition of the Scrip- 
tures. We borrowed from Germany and England nearly all our 
materials, and are just struggling for the higher rewards of biblical 
learning. And in law, where our eminence is least of all ques- 
tionable, there are those among us, who feel, that sufficient of its 
learning, and argument, and philosophy, remains unmastered, to 
excite the ambition of the foremost advocates. 

Let me not be misunderstood. I advert to these considerations 
not to disparage our country, or its institutions, or its means of ex- 
tensive, I had almost said, of universal education. But we should 
not deceive ourselves with the notion, that, because education is 
liberally provided for, the highest learning is within the scope of 
that education. Our schools neither aim at, nor accomplish such 
objects. There is not a more dangerous error than that which 
would soothe us into indolence, by encouraging the belief that our 
literature is all it can, or ought to be ; that all beyond is shadowy 
and unsubstantial, the vain theories of the scientific, or the reve- 
ries of mere scholars. The admonition which addresses itself to 
my countrymen respecting their deficiencies, ought to awaken new 
energy to overcome them. They are accustomed to grapple with 
difficulties. They should hold nothing which human genius or 
human enterprise has yet attained, as beyond their reach. The 
motto on their literary banner should be, Nec timeo nec spemo. 
I have no fears for the future. It may not be our lot to see our 
celebrity in letters rival that of our public polity and free institu- 
tions. But the time cannot be far distant. It is scarcely proph- 
ecy to declare, that our children must and will enjoy it. They 
will see not merely the breathing marble, and the speaking picture, 
among their arts, but science and learning every where paying a 
voluntary homage to American genius. 

There is, indeed, enough in our past history to flatter our pride 
and encourage our exertions. We are of the lineage of the Sax 
ons, the countrymen of Bacon, Locke, and Newton, as well as of 
Washington, Franklin, and Fulton. We have read the history of 
our forefathers. They were men full of piety, and zeal, and an 
unconquerable love of liberty. They also loved human learning, 
and deemed it second only to divine. Here, on this very spot, in 
the bosom of the wilderness, within ten short years after their vol- 
untary exile, in the midst of cares, and privations, and sufferings, 
they found time to rear a little school, and dedicate it to God and 
the church. It has grown ; it has flourished ; it is the venerable 
university, to whose walls her grateful children annually come with 
more than filial affection. The sons of such ancestors can never 
dishonor their memories ; the pupils of such schools can never be 
indifferent to the cause of letters. 

There is yet more in our present circumstances to inspire us 



528 



MR. STORY'S DISCOURSE 



with a wholesome Consciousness of our powers and our destiny. 
We have just passed the jubilee of our independence, and wit- 
nessed the prayers and gratitude of millions ascending to Heaven 
for our public and private blessings. That independence was the 
achievement, not of faction and ignorance, but of hearts as pure, 
and minds as enlightened, and judgments as sound, as ever graced 
the annals of mankind. Among the leaders were statesmen and 
scholars, as well as heroes and patriots. We have followed many 
of them to the tomb, blessed with the honors of their country. We 
have been privileged yet more ; we have lived to witness an 
almost miraculous event in the departure of two great authors of 
our independence on that memorable and blessed day of jubilee. 

I may not in this place presume to pronounce the funeral 
panegyric of these extraordinary men. It has been already done 
by some of the master spirits of our country, by men worthy of 
the task, worthy as Pericles to pronounce the honors of the 
Athenian dead. It was the beautiful saying of the Grecian orator, 
that " This whole earth is the sepulchre of illustrious men. Nor 
is it the inscriptions on the columns in their native soil alone, that 
show their merit ; but the memorial of them, better than all 
inscriptions, in every foreign nation, reposited more durably in 
universal remembrance, than on their own tomb." 

Such is the lot of Adams and Jefferson. They have lived, not 
for themselves, but for their country ; not for their country alone, 
but for the world. They belong to history, as furnishing some 
of the best examples of disinterested and successful patriotism. 
They belong to posterity, as the instructors of all future ages in the 
principles of rational liberty and the rights of the people. They 
belong to us of the present age, by their glory, by their virtues, 
and by their achievements. These are memorials which can 
never perish. They will brighten with the lapse of time, and, as 
they loom on the ocean of eternity, will seem present to the most 
distant generations of men. That voice of more than Roman 
eloquence, wiiich urged and sustained the declaration of indepen- 
dence — that voice, whose first and whose last accents were for his 
country, is indeed mute. It will never again rise in defence of the 
weak against popular excitement, and vindicate the majesty of law 
and justice. It will never again awaken a nation to arms to assert 
its liberties. It will never again instruct the public councils by its 
wisdom. It will never again utter its almost oracular thoughts in 
philosophical retirement. It will never again pour out its strains of 
parental affection, and in the. domestic circle, give new force and 
fervor to the consolations of religion. The hand, too, which 
inscribed the Declaration of Independence is indeed laid low 
The weary head reposes on its mother earth. The mountain 
winds sweep by the narrow tomb, and all around has the loneli- 



AT CAMBRIDGE, 1826. 



529 



ness of desolation. The stranger guest may no longer visit that 
hospitable home, and find him there, whose classical taste and 
various conversation lent a charm to every leisure hour ; whose bland 
manners and social simplicity made every welcome doubly dear ; 
whose expansive mind commanded the range of almost every art 
and science ; whose political sagacity, like that of his illustrious 
coadjutor, read the fate and interests of nations, as with a second 
sight, and scented the first breath of tyranny in the passing gale ; 
whose love of liberty, like his, was inflexible, universal, supreme ; 
whose devotion to their common country, like his, never faltered 
in the worst, and never wearied in the best of times ; whose 
public services ended but with life, carrying the long line of their 
illumination over sixty years ; whose last thoughts exhibited the 
ruling passion of his heart, enthusiasm in the cause of education ; 
whose last breathing committed his soul to God, and his offspring 
to his country. 

Yes, Adams and Jefferson are gone from us forever — gone, as 
a sunbeam to revisit its native skies — gone, as this mortal to put 
on immortality. Of them, of each of them, every American may 
exclaim — 

" Ne'er to the chambers, where the mighty rest, 
Since their foundation, came a nobler guest, 
Nor e'er was to the bowers of bliss conveyed 
A fairer spirit, or more welcome shade." 

We may not mourn over the departure of such men. We 
should rather hail it as a kind dispensation of Providence, to affect 
our hearts with new and livelier gratitude. They were not cut 
off in the blossom of their days, while yet the vigor of manhood 
flushed their cheeks, and the harvest of glory was ungathered. 
They fell not as martyrs fall, seeing only in dim perspective the 
salvation of their country. They lived to enjoy the blessings 
earned by their labors, and to realize all which their fondest 
hopes had desired. The infirmities of life stole slowly and silently 
upon them, leaving still behind a cheerful serenity of mind. In 
peace, in the bosom of domestic affection, in the hallowed rever- 
ence of their countrymen, in the full possession of their faculties, 
they wore out the last remains of life, without a fear to cloud, with 
scarcely a sorrow to disturb its close. The joyful day of our 
jubilee came over them with its refreshing influence. To them, 
indeed, it was " a great and good day." The morning sun shone 
with softened lustre on their closing eyes. Its evening beams 
played lightly on their brows, calm in all the dignity of death. 
Their spirits escaped from these frail tenements without a struggle 
or a groan. Their death was gentle as an infant's sleep. It was 
a long, lingering twilight, melting into the softest shade. 

45 Xxx 



530 



MR. STORY'S DISCOURSE 



Fortunate men, so to have lived, and so to have died. Fortu- 
nate, to have gone hand in hand in the deeds of the revolution. 
Fortunate, in the generous rivalry of middle life. Fortunate, in 
deserving and receiving the highest honors of their country. 
Fortunate in old age to have rekindled their ancient friendship 
with a holier flame. Fortunate, to have passed through the dark 
valley of the shadow of death together. Fortunate, to be indis- 
solubly united in the memory and affections of their countrymen. 
Fortunate, above all, in an immortality of virtuous fame, on which 
history may with severe simplicity write the dying encomium of 
Pericles, " No citizens, through their means, ever put on mourn- 
ing." 

1 may not dwell on this theme. It has come over my thoughts, 
and I could not wholly suppress the utterance of them. It was 
my principal intention to hold them up to my countrymen, not as 
statesmen and patriots, but as scholars, as lovers of literature, 
as eminent examples of the excellence of the union of ancient 
learning with modern philosophy. Their youth was disciplined 
in classical studies ; their active life was instructed by the prescrip- 
tive wisdom of antiquity ; their old age was cheered by its delight- 
ful reminiscences. To them belongs the fine panegyric of Cicero, 
" Erant in eis plurimae litterae, nec ese vulgares, sed interiores quse- 
dam, et reconditse ; divina memoria, summa verborum et gra vitas 
et elegantia; atque haec omnia vitae decorabat dignitas et integ- 
ritas." 

I will ask your indulgence only for a moment longer. Since 
our last anniversary, death has been unusually busy in thinning our 
numbers. I may not look on the right, or the left, without miss- 
ing some of those who stood by my side in my academic course, 
in the happy days spent within yonder venerable walls. 

" These are counsellors, that feelingly persuade us, what we 
are," and what we must be. Shaw and Salisbury are no more. 
The one, whose modest worth and ingenuous virtue adorned a 
spotless life ; the other, whose social kindness and love of letters, 
made him welcome in every circle. But what shall I say of 
Haven, with whom died a thousand hopes, not of his friends and 
family alone, but of his country ? Nature had given him a strong 
and brilliant genius ; and it was chastened and invigorated by grave, 
as well as elegant studies. Whatever belonged to human manners 
and pursuits, to human interests and feelings, to government, or 
science, or literature, he endeavored to master with a scholar's 
diligence and taste. Few men have read so much or so well. 
Few have united such manly sense with such attractive modesty. 
His thoughts and his style, his writings and his actions, were gov- 
erned by a judgment in which energy was combined with candor, 



AT CAMBRIDGE, 1826. 



531 



and benevolence with deep, unobtrusive, and fervid piety. His 
character may be summed up in a single line ; for there 

"was given 

To Haven every virtue under heaven." 

He had just arrived at the point of his professional career, in which 
skill and learning begin to reap their proper reward. He was in 
possession of the principal blessings of life, of fortune, of domes- 
tic love, of universal respect. There are those who had fondly 
hoped, when they should have passed away, he might be found 
here to pay a humble tribute to their memory. To Providence 
it has seemed fit to order otherwise, that it might teach us 
" what shadows we are, and what shadows we pursue." We may 
not mourn over such a loss, as those who are without hope. 
That life is not too short, which has accomplished its highest 
destiny ; that spirit may not linger here, which is purified for 
immortality. 



JUN 15 191,5 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: May 2010 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN COLLECTIONS PRESERVATION 

111 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township. PA 16066 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




01 1 769 408 2 



